Skip to main content
Glama

Change a monitor's speed test settings

vs_monitors_update_performance
DestructiveIdempotent

Turn a monitor's daily phone speed test on or off and set its speed limits. Only the fields sent change.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "vs_monitors_update_performance"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesMonitor id.
performanceEnabledNotrue runs a daily phone speed test.
performanceThresholdsNoSpeed limits in milliseconds (cls is a score): { responseTime, ttfb, fcp, lcp, cls }. Send null to clear.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description usefully adds merge semantics ('only the fields sent change'), which softens the destructive framing, but it does not disclose that sending performanceThresholds replaces the existing threshold set or that null clears it.

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 with the update semantics front-loaded after the core action. No filler, no redundancy.

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 small three-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the action and patch behavior adequately. A note on threshold replacement/clearing would make it fully self-contained.

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 all three parameters including the nested threshold fields are already documented. The description adds only the phrase 'daily phone speed test', which restates the schema's own wording for performanceEnabled, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: toggling a monitor's daily phone speed test and setting its speed limits. This clearly distinguishes it from the many other vs_monitors_update_* siblings covering basics, content, alerting, SSL, etc., without naming any of them explicitly.

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?

'Only the fields sent change' implies PATCH-style partial updates, which guides how to call it. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites or how it relates to siblings like vs_monitors_update_basics or vs_speed_test.

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.