Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Visual Sentinel

by com.visualsentinel
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Plan maintenance

vs_maintenance_create

Plan a maintenance window for some monitors. Alerts for them are held back while it runs, and status pages show the maintenance.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "startTime": "<startTime>",
      "endTime": "<endTime>"
    },
    "name": "vs_maintenance_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesName of the maintenance, shown on status pages.
endTimeYesEnd, ISO 8601. At most 90 days after the start.
timezoneNoIANA time zone the repeat follows, for example Europe/London (default UTC).
startTimeYesStart, ISO 8601 (for example 2026-11-01T22:00:00Z).
monitorIdsNoMonitors covered. Their alerts are held back during the window.
descriptionNoOptional details.
recurrenceKindNoRepeat: none, day, week or month.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds genuine domain behavior beyond the schema: that alerts for covered monitors are suppressed for the duration and that status pages surface the maintenance, which is exactly the side-effect an agent needs to anticipate.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded before the effect clause. Nothing repeated from the schema or the title.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a create tool with full schema coverage and explicit annotations, the description covers purpose and the two main downstream effects. The remaining gaps are minor: it does not say what is returned on success, how recurrence interacts with the window, or that monitorIds is optional (so a maintenance can be scoped to nothing).

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including monitorIds, recurrenceKind and timezone is already documented with ISO 8601 formats and the 90-day cap. The description adds no parameter-level detail of its own beyond the vague "some monitors", making 3 the correct baseline.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ("Plan a maintenance window") plus its scope ("for some monitors"), which distinguishes it from the sibling mutation tools like vs_maintenance_update, vs_maintenance_cancel and vs_maintenance_delete. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, so it is clear but not fully differentiated in-text.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool to reach for when scheduling planned downtime rather than muting monitors. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of the pause/mute siblings as alternatives, and no stated prerequisites such as required permissions or whether the window may start in the past.

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

All Visual Sentinel toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources