Skip to main content
Glama

alert_rule_add

Destructive

Add a new alert rule to LibreNMS with configurable conditions, devices, severity, and triggers.

Instructions

Add a new alert rule to LibreNMS.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
payloadYesAlert rule payload fields: - name (required): Rule name - builder (required): Rule builder JSON with conditions - devices (required): Array of device IDs or [-1] for all devices - severity (required): ok, warning, critical - count (optional): Trigger threshold count (default: 1) - delay (optional): Delay before alerting in seconds - interval (optional): Re-alert interval in seconds - mute (optional): Mute alerts (true/false) - invert (optional): Invert rule logic (true/false) - notes (optional): Rule notes - disabled (optional): Disable rule (0/1) Example: {"name": "Device Down", "severity": "critical", "devices": [-1], "builder": {"condition": "AND", "rules": [...]}}

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior2/5

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

The description adds little beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description merely restates the action. No additional side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits are disclosed.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It is concise and efficient.

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?

Given the detailed input schema and presence of an output schema, the description is adequately complete for a creation tool. It could optionally mention typical outcomes (e.g., returns created rule) but is not lacking.

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% with a detailed payload description including field names, types, and an example. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 the action ('Add'), the resource ('alert rule'), and the system ('LibreNMS'). It is distinct from sibling tools like alert_rule_delete or alert_rule_get.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context for invocation.

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/mhajder/librenms-mcp'

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