Skip to main content
Glama

Get Alert Rule Destinations

get_alert_rule_destinations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Where the calling tenant's alert rules deliver their alerts. READ: available to any authenticated user.

Supply ruleId for one rule; omit it to list every rule. Each entry carries the rule's own channelIds: registry channel UUIDs (resolve names with the investigation service's list_alert_channels), an empty list when the rule's alerts are switched off, or null when the rule has no routing of its own and inherits the tenant's alerting default (read that with the investigation service's get_notification_destinations, source alerting). A rule's own routing outranks the default.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ruleIdNoOptional rule id (UUID); omit to list every rule

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent safety, but the description adds substantial semantic behavior: channelIds can be empty (alerts off), null (inherits tenant default), and rule-level routing outranks the default. This is genuinely useful context beyond annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the resource and READ permission info, followed by structured routing guidance. Slightly dense but every sentence carries operational meaning.

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?

No output schema, yet the description fully explains the shape of entries (channelIds semantics) and points to sibling tools for name resolution and default comparison. Complete for an agent to call and interpret results.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the ruleId description already says 'omit to list every rule'. The description reinforces this and adds semantics about what each entry contains, though the parameter itself is well covered by the schema.

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?

Precise verb+resource: states it returns where the calling tenant's alert rules deliver alerts, and the read-only scoping is clear. Distinguishable from siblings like set_alert_rule_destinations and get_notification_destinations by focusing on per-rule routing.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states 'Supply ruleId for one rule; omit it to list every rule', and routes agents to the appropriate sibling tools for resolving channel names and reading the tenant default. Clear when and how to use it.

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