Skip to main content
Glama

Routebase

by dev.routebase.mcp

List Monitor Checks

list_monitor_checks
Read-only

List the individual checks a monitor ran, newest first — status code, response time and the timing breakdown (DNS, connect, TLS, first byte). Set onlyErrors to see just the failures. Use from and to to narrow the window. Requires project context.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoOnly checks at or before this UTC timestamp (ISO 8601)
fromNoOnly checks at or after this UTC timestamp (ISO 8601, e.g. '2026-07-31T00:00:00Z')
skipNoNumber of checks to skip, defaults to 0
takeNoMaximum number of checks to return, defaults to 50
monitorIdYesPublic ID (GUID) of the monitor, from list_monitors
onlyErrorsNoOnly return checks that failed

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Read-only nature is indicated via the annotation, and the description adds the requirement of project context. No side effects are mentioned; consistent with the readOnlyHint.

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 sentences, efficient and focused, with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Covers the purpose, key fields, filtering, ordering, and project context. Since no output schema is provided, the description appropriately omits return value details.

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

Parameters5/5

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

All parameters have descriptions in the schema, and the description also explains onlyErrors and from/to meanings. The monitorId parameter references list_monitors for the source of the ID.

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?

Clearly states the operation (list) and resource (individual checks of a monitor), includes ordering (newest first) and key fields returned. Distinguishes from sibling list/get tools.

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?

Provides guidance on filtering (onlyErrors, from/to) and the requirement for project context. Does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context implies a unique purpose.

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

All Routebase toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct with clear descriptions. Some pairs like get_header_policies vs get_resolved_headers or get_environment_verification vs get_monitoring_sync_status could be slightly confusing, but the descriptions clarify scope and purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (get_, list_, create_, update_, manage_, etc.). Even the few bare verbs like 'search' and 'set_context' are consistent with the naming scheme.

Tool Count1/5

With 165 tools, the server is extremely heavy. This far exceeds the 'too many' threshold of 25+, making it difficult for an agent to navigate and select the right tool efficiently.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers a very broad API lifecycle domain: specs, environments, test cases, monitors, mock servers, security, governance, documentation, and team management. Read and write operations are present across most areas, with no obvious missing core functionality.

Resources