Skip to main content
Glama
fclairamb

SolidPing

Official
by fclairamb
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

create_status_page

Create a public-facing status page to display the current health of selected checks for your organization.

Instructions

Create a new status page for the organization. A status page is the public-facing dashboard that displays the current health of selected checks.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesStatus page display name (required), e.g. "Public status".
slugYesURL-friendly slug (required, unique per org), e.g. "public".
languageNoLanguage code, e.g. "en" or "fr".
customCssNoCustom CSS injected into the public page as a <style> element. Overrides the theme's CSS custom properties (--brand, --background, --foreground, --card, --border, the status colors, and the .dark variant). Max 64 KB; @import is rejected.
isDefaultNoWhether this is the org's default status page (only one allowed).
visibilityNoVisibility setting. Allowed: "public", "private". Default depends on system config.
autoPublishNoAutomatically publish incidents affecting this page's resources as public incidents. New pages default to true; pages that existed before this feature shipped default to false.
autoResolveNoWhat an auto-created publication does when its incident resolves. Allowed: "always", "if_untouched" (default — a publication a human has edited is left for them to close), "never".
descriptionNoOptional free-text description shown in the UI.
historyDaysNoDays of history to show on the page (default 90).
showAvailabilityNoDisplay availability percentage on the public page.
showResponseTimeNoDisplay response-time charts on the public page.
autoPublishDelaySecondsNoDebounce in seconds before an incident becomes public (default 60). 0 publishes immediately. An incident that resolves inside the delay is never published at all.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.32.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 only states that it creates a resource; it does not mention potential conflicts (e.g., only one default page), required permissions, or side effects on the organization's status pages. This is insufficient for a create operation.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two sentences. The first states the purpose and the second defines the concept. It avoids fluff but could benefit from a mention of alternatives, though it is appropriately sized.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool has 13 parameters and no output schema, the description is quite minimal. It does not explain the expected outcome (e.g., a new status page object) or any constraints like the uniqueness of slug or default page. However, the schema covers parameter details, so the description is adequate but not comprehensive for an operation with many parameters.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already documents all 13 parameters thoroughly. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 action (create) and the resource (status page), and provides a one-sentence definition of what a status page is. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like create_status_page_section, but the scope 'for the organization' and the resource type distinguish it adequately.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., create_status_page_section, update_status_page). It states what it does but does not mention alternatives or conditions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name.

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