Phare

Update a maintenance window

update_maintenance_window

DestructiveIdempotent

Update a maintenance window by ID. The monitoring_mode, starts_at, ends_at, monitors and status_pages fields can only be modified while the maintenance window is scheduled, except for ends_at which can be extended while the maintenance window is in progress.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>",
      "maintenance_window_id": "<maintenance_window_id>"
    },
    "name": "update_maintenance_window"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tags`	No	Resource tags, made of lowercase letters, numbers, `.`, `_`, `:` and `-`. An organization can have up to 200 tags.
`title`	No	Maintenance window title
`ends_at`	No	Date and time when the maintenance window ends, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be after `starts_at` and within the next year.
`monitors`	No	List of monitor IDs linked to the maintenance window
`starts_at`	No	Date and time when the maintenance window starts, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be within the next year.
`project_id`	Yes	ID of the project to act on, see whoami
`description`	No	Description of the maintenance window
`status_pages`	No	List of status page IDs linked to the maintenance window
`monitoring_mode`	No	Monitoring mode during maintenance
`maintenance_window_id`	Yes	ID of the maintenance window to update

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	No	Maintenance window ID
`tags`	No	Resource tags, made of lowercase letters, numbers, `.`, `_`, `:` and `-`. An organization can have up to 200 tags.
`state`	No	Maintenance window state
`title`	No	Maintenance window title
`ends_at`	No	Date and time when the maintenance window ends, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be after `starts_at` and within the next year.
`monitors`	No	List of monitor IDs linked to the maintenance window
`starts_at`	No	Date and time when the maintenance window starts, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be within the next year.
`created_at`	No	Date of creation for the entity
`project_id`	No	Parent project ID
`updated_at`	No	Date of last update for the entity
`description`	No	Description of the maintenance window
`status_pages`	No	List of status page IDs linked to the maintenance window
`monitoring_mode`	No	Monitoring mode during maintenance

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 7, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "created_at": {
+      "description": "Date of creation for the entity",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "description": {
+      "description": "Description of the maintenance window",
+      "examples": [
+        "Planned database upgrade and maintenance"
+      ],
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "ends_at": {
+      "description": "Date and time when the maintenance window ends, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be after `starts_at` and within the next year.",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "id": {
+      "description": "Maintenance window ID",
+      "examples": [
+        1
+      ],
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "monitoring_mode": {
+      "description": "Monitoring mode during maintenance",
+      "enum": [
+        "pause",
+        "mute",
+        "normal"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "monitors": {
+      "description": "List of monitor IDs linked to the maintenance window",
+      "examples": [
+        [
+          1,
+          2,
+          3
+        ]
+      ],
+      "items": {
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "project_id": {
+      "description": "Parent project ID",
+      "examples": [
+        1
+      ],
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "starts_at": {
+      "description": "Date and time when the maintenance window starts, with minute precision (seconds must be `00`). Must be within the next year.",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "state": {
+      "description": "Maintenance window state",
+      "enum": [
+        "scheduled",
+        "in_progress",
+        "completed",
+        "cancelled"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status_pages": {
+      "description": "List of status page IDs linked to the maintenance window",
+      "examples": [
+        [
+          1,
+          2
+        ]
+      ],
+      "items": {
+        "type": "integer"
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "tags": {
+      "description": "Resource tags, made of lowercase letters, numbers, `.`, `_`, `:` and `-`. An organization can have up to 200 tags.",
+      "items": {
+        "examples": [
+          "environment:production"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": [
+        "array",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "Maintenance window title",
+      "examples": [
+        "Database upgrade"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "description": "Date of last update for the entity",
+      "format": "date-time",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare a mutable, destructive, idempotent operation, and the description adds state-dependent behavior the annotations cannot convey: five fields are locked outside the scheduled state, with ends_at extendable while in progress. It stops short of covering permission requirements or failure behavior when constraints are violated.

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, no filler, and the scope ("by ID") is front-loaded ahead of the conditional rules. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 the description need not explain returns, and all 10 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The one genuinely non-obvious risk for an update tool — state-gated fields — is covered explicitly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description earns a step above it by classifying parameters by editability state — monitoring_mode, starts_at, ends_at, monitors and status_pages are state-restricted, implicitly marking title, description and tags as always editable, which the schema does not state.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Update a maintenance window by ID") and the ID-based targeting makes the operation unambiguous against create/delete/cancel siblings. It does not explicitly name a sibling to avoid, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It gives a clear precondition for modifying five specific fields (only while scheduled) and one exception (ends_at extendable during progress), which is real usage context. However, it never says when to use update versus cancel_maintenance_window or complete_maintenance_window, nor whether partial updates leave unspecified fields untouched.

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

All Phare tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?