mcp-uptime-kuma

Update Status Page

updateStatusPage

Update an existing status page by submitting a complete new configuration and ordered monitor groups. Retrieve current settings first to ensure accurate changes.

Instructions

Updates an existing status page. Pass the full config (title, description, theme, published, etc.) and the full publicGroupList — both are replaced wholesale. Each group has a name, weight, and monitorList of [{id}]. Use getStatusPage first to read current state before modifying.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	The status page slug (immutable identifier)
`config`	Yes	Full status page config (title, description, theme, published, showTags, showPoweredBy, domainNameList, customCSS, footerText, icon, etc.)
`imgDataUrl`	No	Icon as data URL. Omit or pass empty string to keep existing.
`publicGroupList`	No	Ordered groups. Each: {name, weight, monitorList: [{id}]}. Defaults to empty list.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`msg`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.11.15Sep 9, 2026
- changedInput schema / properties / config / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -{}New value: +true
```
- changedInput schema / properties / publicGroupList / items / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -{}New value: +true
```

Changed2 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"

changedOutput schema / $schema

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

First observedv0.0.0-devAug 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose a key behavioral trait: config and publicGroupList 'are replaced wholesale' rather than merged. It also explains the group structure and how imgDataUrl can be omitted to keep existing icons, but it does not cover permissions, error behavior, or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the purpose, the critical replacement semantics, and the prerequisite read-first instruction. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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?

The description covers the essential workflow (read first, send full state) and the nested list format, which is the hardest part to infer. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are already provided. The only gap is what happens when the slug does not exist, but the getStatusPage-first instruction mitigates that.

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%, but the description adds value by clarifying that config is the full replacement object and by specifying the publicGroupList item shape as {name, weight, monitorList: [{id}]}. This goes beyond the schema's generic additionalProperties declarations.

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 opens with 'Updates an existing status page', which is a specific verb-resource pair that clearly distinguishes it from createStatusPage and getStatusPage. The 'existing' qualifier and the wholesale-replacement note make the tool's scope unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly instructs to 'Use getStatusPage first to read current state before modifying', giving a clear precondition and pointing to the right sibling tool. It also tells the caller to pass both full config and full publicGroupList, making the correct usage and sequencing explicit.

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