Skip to main content
Glama

LastPing

by dev.lastping

create_api_key

Destructive

Create a new LastPing API key. The plaintext key is returned ONCE and cannot be retrieved again — store it immediately in a secret manager. Set expires_at for a short-lived key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesLabel for the key, e.g. "github-actions".
expires_atNoOptional RFC 3339 expiry, e.g. "2026-12-31T00:00:00Z". Omit for a 90-day key, capped at the creating key's own expiry. A key can never be given a longer life than the key that creates it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / expires_at / description
      Previous value: -"Optional RFC 3339 expiry, e.g. \"2026-12-31T00:00:00Z\". Omit for a key that never expires."New value: +"Optional RFC 3339 expiry, e.g. \"2026-12-31T00:00:00Z\". Omit for a 90-day key, capped at the creating key's own expiry. A key can never be given a longer life than the key that creates it."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses the single most important behavioral trait: 'The plaintext key is returned ONCE and cannot be retrieved again — store it immediately in a secret manager.' This goes well beyond the annotations and is critical for an agent to act correctly after invocation.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the primary action stated first and the key security behavior and parameter guidance following. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundant filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the essential operational facts: what happens to the plaintext key, that it cannot be recovered, and when to use expiration. Nothing operationally essential is missing.

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%, so the input schema already explains name and expires_at in detail. The description adds a usage hint for expires_at but does not meaningfully expand the parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 and object, 'Create a new LastPing API key', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also naturally differentiates from sibling tools like list_api_keys and revoke_api_key, which are about managing existing keys.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The intended use case is clear: generate a new API key, with guidance to set expires_at for short-lived keys. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but no real alternative exists among the siblings, so the context is sufficient.

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

All LastPing toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized by clear resource domains, and the long descriptions carefully separate similar reads. The main ambiguity is create_monitor's upsert behavior overlapping with update_monitor, and list_incidents vs list_open_incidents could be confused from names alone.

Naming Consistency4/5

Almost every tool uses verb_noun snake_case with a consistent CRUD vocabulary like create_, list_, get_, update_, and delete_. Minor deviations exist: get_alert_templates is really a list operation, and discover_monitors_reconcile is an awkward verb-object-verb construction.

Tool Count2/5

Thirty-six tools is a heavy surface for an agent to navigate, even for a full monitoring platform. Most tools are individually purposeful, but the count exceeds the range where an agent can quickly scan and select, and the set would be easier to handle if split across domains.

Completeness4/5

Coverage is strong: monitors, destinations, agents, status pages, API keys, routes, alert templates, incidents, run history, discovery, and Terraform export all have read and lifecycle operations. Minor gaps remain, such as no explicit single-incident view and no acknowledgment/resolution action beyond notes, but core workflows have no dead ends.

Resources