Skip to main content
Glama
spidra-io

spidra-mcp-server

Official
by spidra-io

spidra_create_monitor

Watch templates, presets, or page lists on a schedule and send alerts for new, removed, changed, or page-text updates; optionally estimate costs or test notification channels before creating.

Instructions

Watch a template, a preset or a list of pages on a schedule and get an alert when something changes: new or removed items, changed fields (like a price), or page text changes.

  • The first check runs straight away and records the starting point without alerting.

  • "estimate": true returns the credits per check and per month, for free, without creating it.

  • "testNotification": true sends a sample alert to the "notify" channels, without creating anything, to check a webhook, Slack or Discord URL.

  • The plan limits how many monitors the user can have and how often they check (spidra_account shows it).

  • Confirm the schedule and channels with the user before creating, since each check costs credits.

Cost: each check costs what running its sources costs. A "goal" adds a little AI on checks where something changed.

Example: {"name": "Cable price", "sources": [{"kind": "urls", "urls": ["https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CG1LGWR6"]}], "schedule": {"every": "1d", "at": "09:00", "timezone": "Africa/Lagos"}, "alertOn": "changed", "watchFields": ["price"], "goal": "Only tell me if the price drops"}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
goalNoWhat matters, in plain words, e.g. "only tell me if the price drops". AI reads each change against it and only meaningful ones alert. null removes it.
nameNoA name for the monitor
ruleNoAlert only when a field passes a threshold, e.g. {"field": "price", "op": "lt", "value": 25}. null removes it.
notifyNoWhere alerts go. On update, it replaces all channels.
alertOnNoWhat counts as a change: "new" items (default), "changed" items, "removed" items, "page" text changes (for page lists), or "every" check
sourcesNoWhat to watch: templates, presets or lists of pages
checkNowNoRun the first check now (default true)
estimateNoReturn the cost without creating it
scheduleNoWhen to check (default once a day). The plan sets the shortest allowed: Free daily, Starter hourly, Builder 15 minutes, Pro 5 minutes.
watchFieldsNoFor "changed": only these fields count, e.g. ["price"]
testNotificationNoSend a sample alert to notify, without creating anything

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false): the first check runs immediately and records a baseline without alerting, estimate and testNotification are free/non-mutating, each check costs what its sources cost, 'goal' adds AI cost, and plan tiers cap monitor count and check frequency. This is exactly the side-effect and cost disclosure an agent needs before a creating, credit-spending call.

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?

Front-loaded summary sentence, then scannable bullets for the non-obvious behaviors, a bolded cost note, and a single end-to-end example. For an 11-parameter tool with nested source unions, nothing here reads as padding.

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 no output schema and deep nested parameters, the description covers behavior, defaults, cost model and plan constraints thoroughly. The only gap is that it never says what a successful creation returns (monitor id/record), which an agent may need for a follow-up update or check call.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value by supplying a full worked example that shows how sources, schedule (every/at/timezone), alertOn, watchFields and goal compose together. It also clarifies the default alertOn behavior ('new' items) and the estimate/testNotification semantics in context.

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?

Opens with a concrete verb and resource: 'Watch a template, a preset or a list of pages on a schedule and get an alert when something changes', then enumerates exactly what triggers an alert (new/removed items, changed fields, page text). This clearly separates it from spidra_update_monitor, spidra_list_monitors and spidra_check_monitor in the sibling set.

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?

Explicitly documents three modes of invocation: real creation, 'estimate: true' for a free cost quote, and 'testNotification: true' for validating webhook/Slack/Discord URLs without creating anything. It also routes the agent to spidra_account for plan limits and instructs confirming schedule/channels with the user first because checks cost credits.

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