mcp-uptime-kuma

Get Heartbeats

getHeartbeats

Retrieve historical heartbeat records for any monitor to analyze response times and status changes over time. Returned newest-first, with optional count up to 100 for deeper history.

Instructions

Retrieves historical heartbeat data for a specific monitor (response times, status changes over time). Use this for analyzing patterns or history for one monitor. Beats are returned NEWEST-FIRST. By default returns only the most recent heartbeat; set maxHeartbeats (up to 100) for historical analysis. Keep maxHeartbeats ≤10 unless user requests more. Set important:true for the status CHANGES only (Uptime Kuma's own event list) — that is history, not current state, so do not read status from it. Credentials embedded in a status message URL (user:pass@host) read "***" unless includeSecrets is set.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No	Alias for maxHeartbeats. Prefer maxHeartbeats.
`limit`	No	Alias for maxHeartbeats. Prefer maxHeartbeats.
`important`	No	Return only IMPORTANT beats — the status changes behind Uptime Kuma's event list — fetched live from the server rather than the cache. History only: the newest important beat is not the monitor's current status.
`monitorID`	Yes	The ID of the monitor to get heartbeats for
`maxHeartbeats`	No	If set, returns the most recent X heartbeats (up to 100). If unset, returns only the most recent heartbeat (default: 1)
`includeSecrets`	No	Return credentials in full instead of "***". Off by default: this output is persisted in conversation transcripts and logs. Can also be enabled globally with UPTIME_KUMA_INCLUDE_SECRETS=true.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`monitorID`	Yes
`heartbeats`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.15Sep 9, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / heartbeats / items / properties / msg / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "array"
-  }
-]
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / heartbeats / items / properties / msg / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

Changed6 schema fields changedv0.11.9Aug 21, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

addedInput schema / properties / count

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for maxHeartbeats. Prefer maxHeartbeats.",
+  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / important

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Return only IMPORTANT beats — the status changes behind Uptime Kuma's event list — fetched live from the server rather than the cache. History only: the newest important beat is not the monitor's current status.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / limit

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for maxHeartbeats. Prefer maxHeartbeats.",
+  "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+  "maximum": 100,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / properties / heartbeats / items / properties / time / description

Previous value: -"Timestamp"New value: +"Timestamp, in UTC as \"YYYY-MM-DD HH:mm:ss.SSS\". Uptime Kuma sends no zone marker, so compare against the current UTC time, not local time."

First observedv0.0.0-devAug 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses newest-first ordering, the default of returning one heartbeat, the 100-heartbeat cap, the recommendation to keep maxHeartbeats ≤10, the meaning of important as status-change history rather than current state, and credential masking unless includeSecrets is set.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, usage, ordering, defaults, limits, the important caveat, and the credential-masking warning. The structure front-loads the core purpose and then builds to critical behavioral caveats without unnecessary padding.

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?

For a moderately complex tool with six parameters and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers defaults, limits, ordering, status-vs-history pitfalls, and security-sensitive output, leaving no critical behavioral gap that an agent would need to discover by trial and error.

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, but the description adds real value beyond the schema. It gives practical guidance on maxHeartbeats, clarifies that important returns history rather than current status, and explains the security implications of includeSecrets and credential masking.

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 states a specific verb and resource: retrieving historical heartbeat data for one monitor, including response times and status changes. It clearly frames the tool as history/pattern analysis for a single monitor, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like listHeartbeats or getMonitorSummary.

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?

The description explicitly says to use this for analyzing patterns or history for one monitor, which gives clear context for when it applies. It does not name alternatives or conditions for when not to use it, though the 'one monitor' framing implies a contrast with broader listing tools.

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