librenms-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Alert Template Edit

alert_template_edit

DestructiveIdempotent

Update an existing LibreNMS alert template by supplying its ID and all fields, since the whole template is replaced. Include body, title, recovery title, and alert rule IDs.

Instructions

Edit an existing alert template in LibreNMS.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`payload`	Yes	Alert template edit payload (must include template_id): - template_id (required): Template ID to edit. Without it LibreNMS creates a new template instead of editing the existing one. - name (required): Template name - template (required): Template body (Laravel Blade syntax) - title (required): Alert title template - title_rec (required): Recovery title template - alert_rules (required): Array of alert rule IDs to associate with this template (use [] for none) LibreNMS replaces the whole template on edit, so resend every field, not just the ones being changed.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.11.1Aug 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / payload / description

Previous value: -"Alert template edit payload (must include id field):\n- id (required): Template ID to edit\n- name: Template name\n- template: Template body (Laravel Blade syntax)\n- title: Alert title template\n- title_rec: Recovery title template\n- rules: Array of alert rule IDs to associate with this template"New value: +"Alert template edit payload (must include template_id):\n- template_id (required): Template ID to edit. Without it LibreNMS creates a new\n  template instead of editing the existing one.\n- name (required): Template name\n- template (required): Template body (Laravel Blade syntax)\n- title (required): Alert title template\n- title_rec (required): Recovery title template\n- alert_rules (required): Array of alert rule IDs to associate with this template (use [] for none)\n\nLibreNMS replaces the whole template on edit, so resend every field, not just\nthe ones being changed."

First observedv1.9.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, giving the agent a clear safety profile. The description itself adds no behavioral traits beyond the basic edit action, though it does not contradict the annotations. The full-replacement behavior is disclosed only in the schema, not in 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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It says precisely what the tool does, and the schema is allowed to carry the detailed invocation details.

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?

The description alone is sparse, but the rich input schema covers all required fields and flags the critical full-replacement behavior, while an output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit routing to alert_template_create for new-template scenarios, but that is inferable from the name and schema.

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 the input schema fully documents the nested payload structure including template_id, name, template, title, title_rec, and alert_rules. The tool description itself contributes no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Edit') with a specific resource ('existing alert template') and platform ('LibreNMS'), which clearly distinguishes it from alert_template_create and alert_template_get. The word 'existing' immediately signals that this tool modifies rather than creates.

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 description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alert_template_create or other siblings. The phrase 'existing alert template' implies use for templates that already exist, and the schema's requirement to include template_id adds operational context, but no explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided in the description.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server