Skip to main content
Glama
dewanshparashar

Arbitrum MCP Server

maintenance_status

Check how long since the last maintenance was performed on Arbitrum nodes to monitor operational status and ensure chain health.

Instructions

Check maintenance status - seconds since last maintenance (requires admin API)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rpcUrlNoThe RPC URL of the Arbitrum node (optional if default is set)
chainNameNoChain name (e.g., 'Xai', 'Arbitrum One') - will auto-resolve to RPC URL

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool handler for 'maintenance_status': resolves RPC URL or chain name, instantiates NitroNodeClient, calls getMaintenanceStatus(), formats and returns result as text content.
    case "maintenance_status": {
      const rpcUrl = await this.resolveRpcUrl(
        (args.rpcUrl as string) || (args.chainName as string)
      );
      const nodeClient = new NitroNodeClient(rpcUrl);
      const result = await nodeClient.getMaintenanceStatus();
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2),
          },
        ],
      };
    }
  • src/index.ts:1464-1483 (registration)
    Tool registration and input schema definition for 'maintenance_status' returned by listTools handler in getAvailableTools().
      name: "maintenance_status",
      description:
        "Check maintenance status - seconds since last maintenance (requires admin API)",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object" as const,
        properties: {
          rpcUrl: {
            type: "string",
            description:
              "The RPC URL of the Arbitrum node (optional if default is set)",
          },
          chainName: {
            type: "string",
            description:
              "Chain name (e.g., 'Xai', 'Arbitrum One') - will auto-resolve to RPC URL",
          },
        },
        required: [],
      },
    },
  • Core helper function getMaintenanceStatus() in NitroNodeClient that makes RPC call to 'maintenance_secondsSinceLastMaintenance' and returns MaintenanceStatus.
    async getMaintenanceStatus(): Promise<MaintenanceStatus> {
      try {
        const seconds = await this.makeRpcCall(
          "maintenance_secondsSinceLastMaintenance",
          []
        );
        return {
          secondsSinceLastMaintenance:
            typeof seconds === "number" ? seconds : parseInt(seconds, 10),
        };
      } catch (error) {
        return {
          secondsSinceLastMaintenance: -1,
          error: `Maintenance status not supported on this RPC endpoint: ${
            (error as Error).message
          }`,
        };
      }
    }
  • TypeScript interface defining the MaintenanceStatus return type used by the tool.
    export interface MaintenanceStatus {
      secondsSinceLastMaintenance: number;
      error?: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the admin API requirement, which is useful context about authentication needs. However, it doesn't describe what the tool returns (e.g., a numeric value, status object, or error conditions), whether it has side effects, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. The description adds minimal value beyond the basic purpose.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place by specifying what's checked and the permission requirement. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating the purpose from the constraint for better readability.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (a status check with admin requirements) and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., a number, status object, or error format), how to interpret the 'seconds since last maintenance' metric, or potential failure modes. For a tool with no structured output documentation, this is a significant gap.

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 fully documents both parameters (rpcUrl and chainName). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as how these parameters interact or default behaviors. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('maintenance status'), and includes a key metric ('seconds since last maintenance'). However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'maintenance_trigger' or 'comprehensive_chain_status', which might have overlapping or related functionality.

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?

The description provides some usage context by mentioning 'requires admin API', which implies this tool needs elevated permissions. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'node_health', 'sync_status', or 'comprehensive_chain_status', nor does it provide exclusions or clear prerequisites beyond the API requirement.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dewanshparashar/arbitrum-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server