Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Maintenant

Maintenant

by kOlapsis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

list_alert_escalation_runs

Read-only

Retrieve escalation runs attached to a specific alert to review each escalation execution triggered for that alert.

Instructions

List escalation runs attached to a specific alert. Requires the Pro edition.

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": {
      "alert_id": "<alert_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_alert_escalation_runs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
alert_idYesAlert ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.10.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

readOnlyHint already declares this is a safe read, so the useful addition here is the entitlement prerequisite: 'Requires the Pro edition' is a real failure mode an agent should know before calling. It still does not disclose ordering, pagination, or an empty-result behavior, which keeps it from 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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the one gating constraint. Nothing is wasted, though the bracketing of the edition note could be folded more naturally into a usage sentence.

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?

For a one-parameter read with no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns only by name ('escalation runs'), leaving the shape of a run implicit. The edition prerequisite is the key thing it does supply; pagination and return structure are unaddressed.

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% and there is a single required alert_id, so the schema already does the work. The description reinforces that alert_id selects the parent alert whose runs are returned, but adds no format or validation detail beyond that.

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 (list escalation runs) scoped to one alert, which distinguishes it clearly from the sibling get_escalation_run. It does not explicitly name that sibling or otherwise contrast the two, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The scoping phrase 'attached to a specific alert' implies the tool is used once an alert_id is known, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement and no pointer to the single-run alternative (get_escalation_run) for the case where a run ID is already in hand.

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