Uptimepage

Usage against plan

get_org_usage

Read-only

Which org this connector is bound to, and the account's resource usage against plan limits: monitors, status pages, members, components, and key policy values. Caps are pooled across every org the account owns, so the counts can exceed what this one org holds. Read-only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`org`	Yes	The org slug this connector is bound to.
`plan`	Yes	Plan id (e.g. `free`, `pro`).
`members`	Yes
`targets`	Yes
`org_name`	Yes	The org's display name.
`status_pages`	Yes
`retention_days`	Yes	History retention, days.
`public_components`	Yes
`maintenance_windows`	Yes	Counts windows that have not ended (upcoming and active). Completed windows do not count.
`notification_channels`	Yes
`min_check_interval_secs`	Yes	Minimum allowed check interval, seconds.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 1, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / maintenance_windows / description

Added value: +"Counts windows that have not ended (upcoming and active). Completed windows do not count."

Changed4 schema fields changedSep 6, 2026

changedOutput schema / description

Previous value: -"`get_org_usage` result: usage against the org's plan limits."New value: +"`get_org_usage` result: the account's usage against its plan limits, pooled\nacross every org it owns."

addedOutput schema / properties / org

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The org slug this connector is bound to.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / org_name

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The org's display name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "plan",
-  "targets",
-  "status_pages",
-  "members",
-  "public_components",
-  "maintenance_windows",
-  "notification_channels",
-  "min_check_interval_secs",
-  "retention_days"
-]New value: +[
+  "org",
+  "org_name",
+  "plan",
+  "targets",
+  "status_pages",
+  "members",
+  "public_components",
+  "maintenance_windows",
+  "notification_channels",
+  "min_check_interval_secs",
+  "retention_days"
+]

First observedAug 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the trailing 'Read-only' adds nothing. However, the description contributes a genuinely non-obvious behavioral fact: caps are pooled across every org the account owns, so counts can exceed what this org holds. That caveat prevents a wrong interpretation of the numbers.

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, zero filler, and the identity-plus-metrics content is front-loaded ahead of the pooling caveat. Every clause carries information.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value structure needn't be restated, and with zero parameters there is no input contract to cover. The description supplies the data semantics (pooling) and safety profile needed to use the result correctly, leaving nothing material missing.

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 of 4 applies. There is no parameter semantics to add beyond the schema, and the description correctly spends no space on inputs.

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?

States a specific resource pair — the org a connector is bound to plus the account's resource usage against plan limits — and enumerates the exact metrics returned (monitors, status pages, members, components, policy values). That level of specificity clearly separates it from the nearest sibling, get_org_health, without opening either schema.

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 implied by the content (call it when you need org binding or plan-limit consumption), but the description never states when to prefer it over get_org_health or list_monitors. No exclusions or alternatives are named, so the agent must infer the trigger condition.

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

All Uptimepage tools Inspect

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.