Skip to main content
Glama
lastping-dev

LastPing

by lastping-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

Create status page

create_status_page

Create a status page displaying selected monitors' current status and recent history for users without login access. Private by default; set visibility to public to share.

Instructions

Requires the write scope or higher. Creates a status page: one page showing the current status and recent history of a chosen set of monitors, for people who cannot log in to the project. Pages are private unless visibility is 'public', which publishes every monitor name on the page.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoOptional URL slug, shown in the public link (/status/<slug>). Has to match ^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{1,48}[a-z0-9]$ (3-50 chars, lowercase alphanumeric and hyphens). Slugs are unique across all projects, so a taken one returns 409. Omitted: a random unguessable slug, the safer default for a public page.
titleYesHuman-readable page title, e.g. 'Acme API Status'. Shown at the top of the page, and to anyone the page is shared with.
check_idsNoComma-separated monitor UUIDs to show on the page, in no particular order, from list_monitors. Every id has to belong to this project: an unknown or cross-project id returns 400 and nothing is saved. An empty value is legal and produces a page with no monitors.
visibilityNo'private' (default) or 'public'. A public page is served at an unguessable but unauthenticated URL: anyone with the link sees the title, every monitor's name (often internal, such as 'billing-reconciler') and its up/down history. The free tier allows one public page per project; a second returns 403.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.17
    • changedInput schema / properties / check_ids / description
      Previous value: -"Comma-separated monitor UUIDs to show on the page, in no particular order. Get them from list_monitors. Every id must belong to this project — an unknown or cross-project id returns 400 and nothing is saved. An empty value is legal and produces a page with no monitors on it."New value: +"Comma-separated monitor UUIDs to show on the page, in no particular order, from list_monitors. Every id has to belong to this project: an unknown or cross-project id returns 400 and nothing is saved. An empty value is legal and produces a page with no monitors."
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"Optional URL slug, which is what appears in the public link (/status/<slug>). Must match ^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{1,48}[a-z0-9]$ (3-50 chars, lowercase alphanumeric and hyphens, starting and ending alphanumeric). Slugs are GLOBALLY unique across all projects, not just yours, so a desirable one may be taken — that returns 409. OMIT IT unless the user asked for a specific URL: a random unguessable slug is then generated, which is also the safer default for a public page."New value: +"Optional URL slug, shown in the public link (/status/<slug>). Has to match ^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9-]{1,48}[a-z0-9]$ (3-50 chars, lowercase alphanumeric and hyphens). Slugs are unique across all projects, so a taken one returns 409. Omitted: a random unguessable slug, the safer default for a public page."
    • changedInput schema / properties / visibility / description
      Previous value: -"'private' (default) or 'public'. 'public' means the page is served at a guessable-free but UNAUTHENTICATED URL: anyone with the link sees the title, the name of every monitor on it, and its up/down history. Monitor names are frequently internal ('billing-reconciler', 'acme-corp-nightly-sync'), so treat this as publishing them. Choose 'private' unless the user has actually asked for a page other people can see. The free tier allows exactly ONE public page per project; a second returns 403."New value: +"'private' (default) or 'public'. A public page is served at an unguessable but unauthenticated URL: anyone with the link sees the title, every monitor's name (often internal, such as 'billing-reconciler') and its up/down history. The free tier allows one public page per project; a second returns 403."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare it is a non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds genuinely new behavior: the write-scope auth requirement and the significant side effect that 'public' publishes every monitor name. It does not mention uniqueness/409 behavior or irreversibility, keeping it below 5.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the auth prerequisite, then purpose, then the visibility caveat. No filler or repetition.

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 4-param mutation tool with full schema coverage and annotations but no output schema, the description supplies prerequisites and side effects an agent needs. Return-value expectations are the only real gap, which is minor here.

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 all four parameters are fully documented in the schema (slug rules, title, check_ids cross-project constraint, visibility semantics). The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource, and it goes beyond the name by defining what a status page is: a page showing current status and recent history of chosen monitors, aimed at people who cannot log in. This is clearly distinguishable from create_monitor or update_status_page.

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?

States the prerequisite 'Requires the write scope or higher' and gives the key decision context (private vs public visibility and its exposure consequence). It does not explicitly name alternatives like update_status_page, so it falls short of a 5.

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