Skip to main content
Glama

Update check

update_check
Idempotent

Update an existing check by UID or slug and return the updated check. PATCH semantics — only the fields you pass are modified, others stay as-is. Use create_check to make a new check and delete_check to remove one; to pause without deleting, set enabled:false instead. Requires the mcp scope (mcp:read tokens are refused) and at least the user role in the organization.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew human-readable name, e.g. "API production".
slugNoNew URL-friendly slug, e.g. "api-prod".
configNoReplace check-specific config (full object — not merged).
labelsNoReplace labels object (empty object clears all). Example: {"env":"staging"}.
periodNoNew check interval as HH:MM:SS, e.g. "00:00:30" for 30 seconds.
enabledNoToggle whether the check runs. Set to false to pause the check, true to resume it.
regionsNoPin the check to exactly these regions, e.g. ["eu-west-1","us-east-1"] (placement becomes "pinned"). An empty array puts the check back on the default placement: automatic across regionCount healthy regions (unless the org's own default_regions names a private location, which pins it to those defaults). The check keeps running either way; use enabled: false to stop it.
placementNoSwitch the placement: "auto" lets the scheduler place the check (keeping its current region count and every current region still healthy) and move it off a region that goes dark; "pinned" freezes the current regions unless regions is also given.
failQuorumNoMulti-region quorum: how many of the check's regions must be failing, for the confirmation period, before it is down and an incident opens. "all", "majority" or a whole number such as "2" (clamped to the region count). The default is all regions for 1-2 regions and a majority for 3+. Fewer failing regions than the quorum is a "regional issue": the check shows warning and no incident opens. "all" keeps the per-result rule: any passing region resets the confirmation. Pass "default" to put the check back on the default.
identifierYesCheck UID or URL-friendly slug, e.g. "api-prod" or "63d49e55-97e3-4e8c-b7ab-c862de7a43f3".
regionPoolNoAutomatic placement only: candidate cloud region slugs; an empty array means any. Implies placement auto.
descriptionNoUpdated free-text description shown in the UI.
regionCountNoAutomatic placement only: how many regions run the check. Implies placement auto.
checkGroupUidNoMove to a different group (UID or slug). Pass an empty string to ungroup.
recoveryPeriodSecondsNoWall-clock seconds the check must stay UP before auto-resolving. Any failure inside the window resets the recovery clock. 0 = resolve immediately. Range 0–86400.
confirmationPeriodSecondsNoWall-clock seconds to wait after the first failure before opening an incident. 0 = open immediately. Range 0–86400 (one day).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesCheck UID.
nameNoHuman-readable name.
slugNoURL-friendly slug.
typeNoCheck type, e.g. "http".
configNoCheck-specific configuration for the type.
labelsNoKey-value labels.
periodNoCheck interval as HH:MM:SS.
statusNoSynthesized status: up, down, validating, created or degraded.
enabledNoWhether the check runs.
regionsNoRegions the check runs from.
createdAtNoRFC3339 creation timestamp.
placementNo"pinned" or "auto".
descriptionNoFree-text description.
lastResultAtNoRFC3339 timestamp of the newest real result.
checkGroupUidNoCheck group UID, when the check belongs to a group.
statusChangedAtNoRFC3339 timestamp of the last status change.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full load and it does disclose the key traits: PATCH semantics with untouched fields preserved, plus an auth requirement that mcp:read tokens are rejected and user role is needed. That is useful context, but nothing is said about whether changes are validated or rejected on failure, whether updates are versioned/reversible, or what happens to incidents when a check is disabled. Satisfies the core disclosure bar without going deep.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler, front-loaded with the verb and semantics, then alternatives, then the prerequisite. Every sentence carries distinct information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given a 16-parameter tool with a nested config object, a 100% schema, and an output schema, the definition is mostly complete, but the most complex parameters (regions, regionPool, regionCount, placement) have intricate behavior that is documented only in the schema. That is acceptable, but it leaves the description thin for a tool of this complexity and adds only a global PATCH rule rather than compensating for the interactions between placement parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 applies and the description correctly reports that only passed fields change and that enabled:false pauses. 16 parameters with rich per-parameter docs mean the description adds little beyond that global rule, so the baseline level is appropriate.

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 verb and resource ("Update an existing check by UID or slug") and the observable outcome ("return the updated check"). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from create_check and delete_check so the agent can pick it out of a crowded sibling list without opening schemas.

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?

Names the alternative tools explicitly (create_check to create, delete_check to remove) and gives a non-obvious routing rule: to pause without deleting, set enabled:false rather than calling anything else. This is exactly the when/when-not guidance an agent needs.

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.