Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Maintenant

Maintenant

by kOlapsis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

create_channel

Create notification channels to route Maintenant monitoring alerts to webhooks, email, Telegram, Slack, or Teams.

Instructions

Create a notification channel. The webhook type is open in every edition; email needs Personal, slack needs Pro, teams needs Pro, telegram needs Personal.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "type": "<type>",
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "create_channel"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesDestination: an HTTPS webhook URL, an email address, or a Telegram chat id
nameYesChannel name, unique across channels
typeYesChannel type: webhook, email, telegram, slack or teams. Defaults to webhook.
configNoNon-secret per-type settings as a JSON object, e.g. {"thread_id":"42"} for Telegram
secretNoChannel credential, a Telegram bot token today. Write-only: it is never read back.
enabledNoWhether the channel accepts deliveries, default true
headersNoExtra HTTP headers as a JSON object of strings, webhook types only

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full safety/profile burden, and it does add real value by disclosing per-type edition requirements. However it omits other mutation-relevant behavior: what happens on duplicate name (schema says unique), whether creation validates/delivers, and that the secret is write-only -- the latter only appears in the schema, not the description.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the core action front-loaded and the constraint data compressed into a single readable clause. Every word earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter create tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the main gating constraint. It is slightly thin on failure/conflict behavior and write-only secret handling, which matter for a creation mutation with zero annotations.

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, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the edition requirement mapped per value of `type`. That is genuine constraint information an agent needs before choosing a type, lifting it above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a notification channel"), which is clearly distinct from the other create_* siblings (create_trigger, create_incident, create_escalation_policy). It never names a sibling or points at update_channel/test_channel, so differentiation is by resource noun alone rather than explicit routing.

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 edition-gating sentence gives concrete preconditions for each channel type (webhook open everywhere, email=Personal, slack/teams=Pro, telegram=Personal), which directly informs whether the caller can use this tool for a given type. It stops short of stating when to prefer update_channel over creating, or what to do when a same-named channel already exists.

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