Pingstack

Update dashboard section

update_dashboard_section

DestructiveIdempotent

Rename a section of a custom dashboard, or set which checks it holds. check_ids lists the section's checks in display order; each must already be on the dashboard, checks listed move into the section, and checks left out move outside any section. Checks stay on the dashboard either way. Returns the section with its checks in order.

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": {
      "dashboard_id": "<dashboard_id>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_dashboard_section"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Section id, as the dashboard's sections list reports it.
`name`	No	New section heading.
`check_ids`	No	The section's checks in display order. Each must already be on the dashboard; checks listed here move into this section, and its other checks move out of any section.
`dashboard_id`	Yes	Dashboard id (dash_…).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes
`name`	Yes
`position`	Yes
`check_ids`	Yes
`dashboard_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's key contribution is scoping that destruction: 'Checks stay on the dashboard either way' reassures the agent that only section membership is affected. It also notes the call returns the section with its checks in order, which the annotations do not cover.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the two operations before the mechanics and the return value. There is minor redundancy with the check_ids schema text, but no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present and annotations covering the safety profile, the definition covers what an agent needs: the two modes, the membership rule, and the guarantee that checks are not removed from the dashboard. The one gap is clarifying optionality of name versus check_ids in a 2-required-parameter call.

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% and the schema text for check_ids is nearly identical to the description, so little is added beyond the field descriptions. The description does reinforce display-order semantics and the move-in/move-out rule, but says nothing about whether name and check_ids are independently optional partial updates.

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 gives two specific verbs and one resource: rename a section, or set which checks it holds. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from attach_check_to_dashboard and create_dashboard_section by stating each check 'must already be on the dashboard', so an agent can tell this is a membership edit rather than a creation or attach operation.

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?

It clearly establishes the context for use: checks listed move in, unlisted ones move out of the section, and everything stays on the dashboard. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as reorder_dashboard_checks or attach_check_to_dashboard, which matters because ordering is also expressible through check_ids.

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

All Pingstack 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.

Resources

Need Help?