Skip to main content
Glama

Devops Watch Stack

devops_watch_stack
Idempotent

Check the health of a named vendor stack — a saved list of vendors representing your infrastructure dependencies. On the first call, provide vendors to define the stack; subsequent calls can omit vendors to reuse the persisted list. Returns a unified health snapshot with an aggregate rollup plus per-vendor detail. A vendor that cannot be resolved or reached is reported in its own row and left out of the saved stack, so one bad entry never discards the sweep. Ideal for morning status checks or pre-deploy sweeps. Multiple stacks can coexist (e.g., "production", "staging").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNosummary: indicator + degraded components + active incidents. detailed: adds component lists and maintenance windows.summary
vendorsNoVendor slugs (e.g., "github", "aws") or raw Atlassian Statuspage base URLs. When provided, saves this list as the stack. When omitted, uses the previously saved list for stack_name.
stack_nameNoName for this vendor stack. Defaults to "default". Use distinct names to manage multiple stacks (e.g., "production", "data-layer"). Letters, digits, hyphens, and underscores, optionally separated by single dots or slashes ("prod.eu", "team/prod"); 1-64 characters. No spaces or colons.default
component_limitNoMaximum components returned per vendor in detailed mode (1-500). Large status pages publish hundreds of components, so a full stack at a high limit returns a very large response; narrow with component_filter instead where possible.
component_filterNoCase-insensitive substring matched against component names in detailed mode (e.g., "api" to check just the API components). Applied before component_limit, so it is the way to reach a component that the cap would otherwise omit. Ignored in summary mode.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
capNoThe per-vendor component_limit that was applied. Present only when truncated.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
shownNoComponents returned across the stack. Present only when truncated.
healthNoAggregate health rollup: all_operational = everything clear, maintenance = at least one vendor in a scheduled window and nothing worse open, degraded = at least one minor issue, partial_outage = at least one major issue, major_outage = at least one critical outage, unknown = at least one vendor could not be checked (unresolvable entry, blocked target, or failed fetch) and no checked vendor reported a worse issue. Never all_operational when any vendor errored or is in a window.
noticeNoPlain-language explanation of the capped component lists — how many components were omitted and how to reach them (component_filter to target one, component_limit to raise the cap). Present only when truncated.
summaryNoAggregate health counts across all checked vendors. Buckets partition the stack: operational + degraded + down + maintenance + unavailable = total.
vendorsNoPer-vendor status results.
truncatedNoTrue when at least one vendor's component list was capped at component_limit. Absent when nothing was capped.
checked_atNoISO 8601 UTC timestamp of this check.
stack_nameNoName of the stack checked.
totalCountNoComponents matching component_filter across the stack before the cap. Present only when truncated.
omitted_vendorsNoEntries that could not be resolved or whose URL was blocked; they still appear in vendors[] with an error. A call that saved the stack left them out of the write; a call that reused a saved stack leaves them in it until you re-provide the vendors list. Empty when every entry resolved.
stack_persistedNoTrue when the vendor list was saved to state on this call. Only the vendors that resolved are saved — see omitted_vendors.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses behavioral traits beyond the annotations: it persists the vendor list on first call, and handles unresolvable vendors by excluding them from the saved stack. This is important side-effect information not present in the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds meaningful context about state mutation and error handling, though annotations already indicate non-read-only behavior.

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?

The description is concise yet complete, with each sentence serving a distinct purpose: defining the tool, explaining persistence, describing output, addressing edge cases, suggesting use cases, and clarifying multi-stack support. Information is front-loaded with the primary purpose, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

Given the presence of a detailed output schema (indicated by has_output_schema=true), the description only needs to cover selection and invocation context. It addresses the tool's purpose, usage timing, persistence side effects, error handling, and stack naming. No critical information is missing for an agent to correctly choose and invoke this tool.

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%, and each parameter has a detailed description. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides; it only references the vendors and stack_name conceptually. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly, and the description adds no extra semantic information.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Check the health' and the resource 'named vendor stack', defining a specific purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., devops_check_certs, devops_check_dns) by focusing on a persisted list of vendors and an aggregate rollup. The resource is well-defined and the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description gives explicit usage context: 'Ideal for morning status checks or pre-deploy sweeps' and explains the first-call vs subsequent-call pattern. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when NOT to use this tool, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use. The persistence behavior and multi-stack support further guide usage.

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.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct aspect of DevOps status monitoring: certificate health, DNS resolution, incident history, vendor discovery, current status, action suggestions, and stack monitoring. Even the overlapping status_check and watch_stack have clear differences (arbitrary targets vs saved stacks). No ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tools share the devops_ prefix and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (check_certs, check_dns, get_incidents, list_vendors, suggest_action, watch_stack). The exception is devops_status_check, which inverts to noun_verb, but it's still readable and doesn't cause confusion.

Tool Count5/5

7 tools is well within the 3-15 sweet spot for a domain-specific server. Each tool covers a necessary function with no redundancy or bloat, making the surface area easy to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle of DevOps status monitoring: discovery, health checks, incident lookup, certificate and DNS checks, and actionable recommendations. Minor gaps like a dedicated tool for viewing a single incident in isolation are mitigated by filtering in get_incidents. The stack management is a bonus that adds convenience.