Ambari MCP Server

ambari_alerts_updatenotification

Update an existing alert notification target in your Ambari cluster by specifying the cluster name, target ID, and updated notification data as a JSON string.

Instructions

Update an existing alert notification target

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": {
      "clusterName": "<clusterName>",
      "targetId": "<targetId>",
      "notificationData": "<notificationData>"
    },
    "name": "ambari_alerts_updatenotification"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`clusterName`	Yes	The name of the cluster
`targetId`	Yes	The notification target ID
`notificationData`	Yes	JSON string containing updated notification target data

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 27, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only says 'Update an existing alert notification target'. It does not disclose behavioral traits like partial vs full replacement, what happens if the target doesn't exist, required permissions, or side effects.

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?

The description is a single, clear sentence (7 words) that states the purpose directly and is front-loaded. It is appropriately concise, though it could be slightly expanded for behavioral context.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too terse. It lacks essential details like the expected JSON structure for notificationData, error handling, and return behavior, leaving the agent underinformed.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what's already in the schema, so baseline 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?

The description clearly states 'Update an existing alert notification target', specifying the action (update) and resource (alert notification target). It distinguishes from siblings like create, delete, and get notifications.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing the target ID, or conditions under which to prefer create or delete.

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

Deploy Server