Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
iran-cloud-status-mcp

iran-cloud-status-mcp

by sepehr071
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Incidents

cs_incidents
Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists recent outages, degradations, and announcements from Iranian cloud providers, newest first, with update timelines and filters for provider, time window, status, and text search.

Instructions

List recent incidents (outages, degradations, announcements) of the Iranian cloud providers, newest first, with their latest update.

ParsPack entries are announcements (status 'notice' while open). Large days cost extra Hamravesh requests. Next: cs_incident for one; cs_reliability for counts.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "cs_incidents"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoStarted within this many days.
limitNoMost incidents to return, newest first.
queryNoTitle or components contain this text.
updatesNoInclude the full update timeline, not just the latest.
providerNoOne provider; leave out for all that support this tool.
active_onlyNoOnly unresolved incidents.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description correctly spends its budget on what they don't say: result ordering, that only the latest update is attached by default, and that large `days` values incur extra Hamravesh requests (a real cost/latency signal). It stops short of saying anything about truncation or empty-result behavior, which keeps it from a 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?

Four short lines: what it returns first, the provider caveat second, the cost note third, sibling routing last. No sentence is redundant and nothing important is buried.

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 six-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: scope, ordering, default payload, cost caveat, and alternatives. It does not describe the result envelope (fields per incident, whether provider coverage varies per entry), which is the only meaningful gap.

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 coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented in the schema and the baseline is 3. The description adds one genuinely new parameter-related fact – that widening `days` increases upstream request cost – but does not clarify `updates`, `limit`, or `active_only` beyond the schema's own text.

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 ("List recent incidents") plus the domain (Iranian cloud providers), the ordering (newest first), and the payload shape (with their latest update). The closing line explicitly separates it from cs_incident (single item) and cs_reliability (counts), so an agent can route without opening a schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names both alternatives and the condition that selects each: cs_incident for one incident, cs_reliability for counts. It also flags a provider-specific caveat (ParsPack entries are announcements, status 'notice' while open) that changes how results should be interpreted.

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