FILTRIX.net

save_scanner_monitor

Create a scanner window (no monitor_id) or change one of yours: name, filters, Telegram alerts on/off, running on/off. Only the arguments you pass are changed.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "save_scanner_monitor"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Name of the scanner window.
`filters`	No	Live conditions, AND-joined (columns from search_scanner_columns); replaces the window's filters.
`running`	No	Turn the window's live scanning on or off.
`monitor_id`	No	Window to change (from list_scanner_monitors); omit to create a new one.
`telegram_alerts`	No	Turn the window's Telegram alerts on or off.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful trait the annotations do not convey: 'Only the arguments you pass are changed', i.e. partial-update/PATCH semantics. It does not mention ownership/permission requirements ('one of yours' only implies them) or that filters replace rather than merge.

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, with the create/update distinction and the partial-update rule front-loaded. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 and full annotation coverage in place, the description supplies the two things that matter most for correct invocation: mode selection and partial-update semantics. Minor gaps remain around permissions/ownership and whether filters overwrite existing conditions, but those are partly handled by the schema.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter including the create-vs-update meaning of monitor_id. The description restates the field list (name, filters, Telegram alerts, running) and confirms partial-update behavior, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb+resource ('Create a scanner window' / 'change one of yours') and immediately disambiguates the two modes via the monitor_id condition. It also enumerates the mutable fields, so an agent can tell this apart from siblings like delete_scanner_monitor or list_scanner_monitors without consulting the schema.

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 gives an explicit selection rule: omit monitor_id to create, supply it to change an existing window. It does not name alternatives or point at list_scanner_monitors for discovering ids (that hint lives in the schema parameter description), and it offers no exclusion guidance, so it falls short of a full when/when-not treatment.

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

All FILTRIX.net 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?