Skip to main content
Glama
lastping-dev

LastPing

by lastping-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

Update status page

update_status_page
DestructiveIdempotent

Update a status page's title, slug, visibility, or monitor set. Omitted arguments stay unchanged, so you can modify one field without affecting others.

Instructions

Requires the write scope or higher. Updates a status page's title, slug, visibility or monitor set; arguments not supplied keep their value (the tool reads the page and merges, so an omitted check_ids never blanks it). A supplied check_ids replaces the whole monitor set; list_status_pages returns the current ids. A new slug changes the public URL and breaks links already shared.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesStatus page UUID, from list_status_pages.
slugNoNew URL slug. Omitted: unchanged. A change breaks every link already handed out. Same format and global uniqueness as on create; a taken slug returns 409.
titleNoNew page title. Omitted: unchanged.
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. Replaces the page's whole monitor set. Omitted: unchanged.
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. Omitted: unchanged. Switching to 'public' publishes every monitor name already on the page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 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. REPLACES the page's whole monitor set. Omit to leave the current set alone."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. Replaces the page's whole monitor set. Omitted: unchanged."
    • changedInput schema / properties / slug / description
      Previous value: -"New URL slug. Omit to leave unchanged — which is almost always right, because changing it breaks every link already handed out. Same format rules and same global uniqueness as on create; a taken slug returns 409."New value: +"New URL slug. Omitted: unchanged. A change breaks every link already handed out. Same format and global uniqueness as on create; a taken slug returns 409."
    • changedInput schema / properties / title / description
      Previous value: -"New page title. Omit to leave unchanged."New value: +"New page title. Omitted: unchanged."
    • 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. Omit to leave unchanged. Switching a page from private to public publishes every monitor name already on it."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. Omitted: unchanged. Switching to 'public' publishes every monitor name already on the page."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description goes well beyond them by disclosing merge semantics (a read-and-merge, so omitted fields are never blanked), the whole-set replacement of check_ids, the irreversible link breakage a slug change causes, and the fact that going 'public' publishes every monitor name. Those are exactly the side effects an agent must weigh before a destructive call.

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 front-loaded sentences: the permission requirement first, then the mutation semantics, then the two highest-risk caveats (whole-set replacement, URL breakage). Every clause carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

For a destructive update tool with no output schema, the description covers permissions, merge behavior, validation failure modes and the user-visible consequences of public/slug changes. Combined with the annotations' safety profile, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 per-field semantics (omitted = unchanged, 409 on taken slug, 400 on cross-project ids, 403 on second public page) are already documented in the schema. The description's 'reads the page and merges' framing adds a useful holistic view but largely restates what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Updates a status page') and enumerates the mutable fields (title, slug, visibility, monitor set), which cleanly separates it from create_status_page, delete_status_page and list_status_pages. An agent can identify the tool's job without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite ('Requires the write scope or higher') and routes the agent to sibling tools for inputs: list_status_pages for the check_ids, list_monitors implicitly for monitor UUIDs. It does not spell out when to choose this over create/delete_status_page, but the context is clear enough that no exclusion rules are needed.

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