Skip to main content
Glama
industrial-aiops

OT-AIops Energy

downtime_triage

Read-only

Identify the first alarm to inspect, likely root cause, and precursor warnings for a stopped line. Cross-checks alarm vs. RCA verdict and recommends next data.

Instructions

[READ][risk=low] One-call downtime triage: first-look alarm + RCA cause + precursors.

Answers the operator's three simultaneous questions on a stopped line — which
alarm to look at first, the likely cause, and whether anything warned us —
then cross-checks whether the first-out alarm agrees with the RCA verdict.
Composes alarm_cascade + downtime_root_cause + pdm_forecast over ONE incident;
every field traces to a sub-report echoed under 'cascade'/'rca'/
'precursor_forecasts'. Read-first and advisory: it proposes but executes
nothing. Thin evidence downgrades honestly rather than guessing.

Args:
    window: {start (ISO-8601), end?, asset?, category?}. If 'end' is omitted
        but state_series is given, the first running→stopped span bounds it.
    alarms: Alarm/condition events — {source, timestamp, message?, priority?,
        state?}. Feeds BOTH the first-out cascade and the RCA.
    tags: Per-tag samples — {ref, samples:[...], warn_high?, ...} (via tag_health).
    dataflow: A diagnose_dataflow result dict (localizes comms vs field).
    state_series: {timestamp, state} samples to bound the window if 'end' is absent.
    precursors: Signals to check for a pre-incident trend — [{signal, series:
        [scalars or {value, timestamp}], warn_high?, alarm_high?, warn_low?,
        alarm_low?}]; each is run through pdm_forecast and kept only when it was
        degrading/imminent before the trip.
    cascade_window_s: Quiet gap (s) separating alarm cascades (default 60).
    lead_window_s: Causal lead window before onset (default 300s).
    cause_weights: Optional per-site {cause: multiplier} RCA override.
    imminent_within_s: ETA horizon that marks a precursor 'imminent' (default 24h).
    include_graph: When true, the echoed 'rca' sub-report also carries a 'graph'
        block — the SAME verdict re-projected as a causal graph {nodes, edges,
        mermaid, meta} (signal → cause → downtime) for a frontend. Pure re-shape;
        no new reasoning. Omit to keep the flat rca summary (default).

Returns dict: {window, triage:{first_look:{source, ts, cascade_size, basis},
    likely_cause:{cause, verdict, confidence, confidence_band,
    recommended_action}, cross_check:{status ('corroborated'|'diverging'|
    'no_alarm_root'|'no_rca_primary'), detail}, precursors_missed:[{signal,
    status, direction, eta_to_limit, unit, limit}], recommended_next_data},
    cascade:{...}, rca:{verdict, primary_cause, top_hypotheses, graph?},
    precursor_forecasts:[...], anti_hallucination}.

Example: downtime_triage(window={"start":"2026-06-28T10:00:00Z","asset":"line1"},
    alarms=[{"source":"M1_DRIVE","timestamp":"2026-06-28T09:59:50Z",
             "message":"motor overload trip"}],
    precursors=[{"signal":"M1_temp","series":[...],"warn_high":80}]).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagsNo
alarmsNo
windowYes
dataflowNo
precursorsNo
state_seriesNo
cause_weightsNo
include_graphNo
lead_window_sNo
cascade_window_sNo
imminent_within_sNo
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes far beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint annotations by explicitly stating 'READ' and 'risk=low', 'proposes but executes nothing', and 'Thin evidence downgrades honestly rather than guessing'. This provides clear behavioral context about safety, advisory nature, and handling of uncertain evidence, with no contradiction.

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?

Though lengthy, the description is well-structured with clear sections (summary, Args, Returns, Example) and every sentence adds substantive detail. The front-loaded summary conveys the core purpose immediately, and the parameter explanations are essential for the complex tool. No fluff or repetition.

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?

With 11 parameters, no output schema, and complex composite behavior, the description is exceptionally complete. It details the expected input structures, the composition of sub-reports, the return dictionary with all fields, and includes a concrete example. It fully equips an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining every parameter in the Args section. It provides meaningful semantics for window, alarms, tags, dataflow, state_series, precursors, cascade_window_s, lead_window_s, cause_weights, imminent_within_s, and include_graph, including defaults and behavior.

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 states it is a 'One-call downtime triage' that composes alarm cascade, RCA, and precursor forecasts into a single tool answering three explicit questions about a stopped line. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like alarm_cascade, downtime_root_cause, and pdm_forecast, which are listed as components.

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?

It specifies the primary use case ('on a stopped line') and notes the tool is read-first and advisory. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools for simpler cases (e.g., if only one question is needed). The composition context implies the usage but lacks explicit exclusions.

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/industrial-aiops/industrial-aiops-energy'

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