Skip to main content
Glama
dnsdoctor

DNS Doctor

by dnsdoctor
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Get Monitoring Alerts

get_alerts
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read a monitored domain's alert log to see what changed or was flagged, including dashboard-only rows skipped in digest emails. Filter by domain or type, and page older results with before.

Instructions

Use this when a signed-in operator asks what changed on a monitored domain, or what the monitoring has flagged. Read the monitoring alert log for the domains the caller's account monitors, newest first. Requires an API token. Each row carries id, domain, type, check, summary, a deterministic detail map, created_at, email_sent_at, acknowledged_at and delivery_class — a 'dashboard_only' row was deliberately kept out of the digest mail, so an agent watching only the inbox would never see it; this log is the complete picture. PAGE DOWN BEFORE ADVANCING since: next_before is non-null exactly when older rows remain, and a caller that ignores it, takes a full page and moves its watermark to the newest row it saw drops every row it did not receive. since is an INCLUSIVE floor, so rows repeat rather than go missing — de-duplicate on id. READ-ONLY by decision: there is no ack and no delete here, because acknowledging an alert is the human's own triage on their dashboard and an agent that acks on their behalf silences a row they have never seen. Report what the log says and let them clear it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoOptional alert-type filter, e.g. 'record_changed'. An unknown value is rejected rather than silently returning an empty page — omit it unless you know the exact type.
limitNoPage size, 1..100 (default 50). Page down with `before` before you advance `since`, or you will skip every row you did not receive.
sinceNoOptional ISO-8601 timestamp: return alerts created at or after it (INCLUSIVE). Poll by storing the newest created_at you have seen and passing it back — rows repeat rather than go missing, so de-duplicate on id.
beforeNoThe opaque cursor from a previous page's next_before, relayed verbatim to fetch the next older page. Never construct or edit one.
domainNoOptional filter to ONE of the account's verified monitored domains. Omit it for every domain the account monitors; an unowned or unknown name is refused as not found.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.3.1

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description nonetheless adds real context beyond it — the API-token requirement, the fact that 'dashboard_only' rows never appear in the digest mail, and the reason acking is deliberately absent. It stops short of stating rate limits or retention windows, which keeps it off a 5.

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 trigger and the read itself, and every sentence is substantive. It is long and repeats the pagination-skip warning in slightly different words, so it is dense rather than perfectly tight, but the length is justified by the operational hazards it warns about.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the return-shape burden and does it: it enumerates the row fields (id, domain, type, check, summary, detail map, created_at, email_sent_at, acknowledged_at, delivery_class) and names next_before as the pagination signal. An agent has everything needed to call and consume this correctly.

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 and each parameter is already documented. The description adds the cross-parameter discipline the schema only implies: `since` is an inclusive floor so rows repeat and must be de-duplicated on id, and `before`/`limit` must be exhausted before the watermark advances.

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 and resource ('Read the monitoring alert log for the domains the caller's account monitors, newest first') and scopes it to the caller's account. No sibling tool covers alert logs, and the trigger ('what changed on a monitored domain, or what the monitoring has flagged') makes the boundary against get_report/get_readiness obvious.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use trigger tied to a signed-in operator, plus a clear when-not-to-act direction: no ack and no delete, because acknowledging is the human's triage. It also prescribes the correct call sequence (page down before advancing `since`) rather than leaving it to inference.

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