Skip to main content
Glama
fclairamb

SolidPing

Official
by fclairamb
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

update_check

Partially update an existing uptime check by UID or slug, modifying only the fields you specify.

Instructions

Update an existing check by UID or slug. PATCH semantics — only the fields you pass are modified, others stay as-is.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew human-readable name, e.g. "API production".
slugNoNew URL-friendly slug, e.g. "api-prod".
configNoReplace check-specific config (full object — not merged).
labelsNoReplace labels object (empty object clears all). Example: {"env":"staging"}.
periodNoNew check interval as HH:MM:SS, e.g. "00:00:30" for 30 seconds.
enabledNoToggle whether the check runs.
regionsNoReplace region list, e.g. ["eu-west-1","us-east-1"]. Pass an empty array to run from no regions (effectively pauses execution).
identifierYesCheck UID or URL-friendly slug, e.g. "api-prod" or "63d49e55-97e3-4e8c-b7ab-c862de7a43f3".
descriptionNoUpdated free-text description shown in the UI.
checkGroupUidNoMove to a different group (UID or slug). Pass an empty string to ungroup.
recoveryPeriodSecondsNoWall-clock seconds the check must stay UP before auto-resolving. Any failure inside the window resets the recovery clock. 0 = resolve immediately. Range 0–86400.
confirmationPeriodSecondsNoWall-clock seconds to wait after the first failure before opening an incident. 0 = open immediately. Range 0–86400 (one day).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.32.1

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses PATCH semantics — only passed fields are modified, others remain unchanged — which is a critical behavioral trait beyond the schema. It does not cover permissions, response shape, or side effects, but the PATCH disclosure is genuinely informative.

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?

A single, tightly worded sentence front-loads the action and resource, then immediately states the most important semantic nuance. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

All parameters are thoroughly documented in the schema, and the description covers the core update behavior. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left without information about return values, error behavior, or side effects for this 12-parameter mutation tool, so the description is adequate but not complete.

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 fully documents all 12 parameters. The description adds the general PATCH interpretation of parameters but does not elaborate on any individual parameter beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 clearly names the verb ('Update'), the resource ('an existing check'), and the identification method ('by UID or slug'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like create_check, delete_check, and get_check.

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 phrase 'Update an existing check' provides clear context for when to use this tool versus create_check or delete_check. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full routing guidance.

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