Skip to main content
Glama

maintenance_window_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all non-deleted maintenance-window summaries in the authenticated organization, including past, current, and scheduled windows. Returns title, creation timestamp, StartTime, and EndTime as stored UTC timestamps; compare them with current UTC time to determine whether a window is active. No pagination or result limit.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "maintenance_window_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive call, and the description adds real behavior beyond them: soft-deleted windows are excluded, timestamps are stored in UTC, and there is no pagination or result limit. That last point is valuable because it warns the agent the full result set arrives at once.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with scope and then return semantics, with no filler. Every clause adds a fact the agent would otherwise have to discover.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the field names returned, the filtering rule (non-deleted), the timestamp convention, and the absence of pagination. That covers everything needed to invoke and interpret the call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is nothing in the input schema needing explanation. The description spends its words on output semantics instead, which is the sensible use of space here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Uses a specific verb and resource ("List all non-deleted maintenance-window summaries") and bounds the scope to the authenticated organization and to past, current, and scheduled windows. This clearly separates it from the sibling maintenance_window_get, which would return a single window's detail.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear usage context, including the instruction to compare the returned StartTime/EndTime against current UTC time to decide if a window is active. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over maintenance_window_get for per-window detail, so the routing is left slightly implicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources