Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Breakage Calendar MCP server

Breakage Calendar MCP server

by CyberNative-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Hybrid

Upcoming dated breaks

list_upcoming_breaks
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists upcoming Breakage Calendar dates when runtimes, images, APIs, AI models, CI runners, certificates or time-zone rules stop working. Filter by area or keyword and see the fix type.

Instructions

Lists Breakage Calendar dates still to come: runtimes, images, APIs, AI models, CI runners, certificates and time-zone rules that stop working on a known date, each with the kind of fix (tested, guide, or none yet). Filter by area or a word.

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": "list_upcoming_breaks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
areaNoPart of an area name, e.g. "AI APIs", "CI runners", "Time zones"
queryNoA word to find in the title or text, e.g. "postgres"
days_aheadNoDates up to this many days ahead (default 90). Late announced dates are always included.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail by specifying what each result carries – the remediation status ('tested, guide, or none yet') – which is otherwise unknowable. It stops short of describing ordering or result volume.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and the core concept, then a single supporting clause covering content and filtering. The long enumeration of break categories is informative but slightly list-heavy; no sentence is outright waste.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining returns and does so by naming the fix-status field and the break categories. A zero-required-parameter, three-filter list tool needs no more than what is here combined with the fully documented 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%, with each parameter carrying its own example values and the days_ahead default/late-announcement caveat documented inline. The description's 'Filter by area or a word' merely restates area and query, adding no syntax, matching, or combination semantics beyond the schema.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('Breakage Calendar dates still to come') and pins the scope with a concrete enumeration of what a break can be (runtimes, images, APIs, AI models, CI runners, certificates, tz rules). The future-only framing plus the 'kind of fix' payload clearly separates it from a single-record viewer like get_break.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and scope: reach for it when you want upcoming dated breakages. It offers 'Filter by area or a word' as the narrowing mechanism, but gives no explicit when-not, no mention of get_break/check_* alternatives, and no guidance on which filter to prefer when both apply.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools