API Status Check MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASC_BASE_URL | No | Base URL for the API | https://apistatuscheck.com |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": true
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| check_statusD | – |
| list_apisD | – |
| list_categoriesD | – |
| check_categoryD | – |
| check_urlD | – |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 5 tools
The tools have distinct purposes based on their names: checking categories, statuses, URLs, and listing APIs and categories. While 'check_category' and 'list_categories' might overlap slightly (both relate to categories), they appear to serve different functions (checking vs. listing), so ambiguity is minimal.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'check_' or 'list_' prefixes, using snake_case throughout. This makes the naming predictable and easy to understand, with no deviations in style.
With 5 tools, the count is well-scoped for an API status check server. It covers core operations like checking and listing without being overly sparse or bloated, fitting typical expectations for such a domain.
The tools cover checking and listing operations, but there are notable gaps for a full API status management system. For example, there are no tools for creating, updating, or deleting APIs or categories, which limits lifecycle coverage and could lead to dead ends in agent workflows.