checkly_create_variableMODIFIES THE CHECKLY ACCOUNT: creates a new account-level environment variable. Additive (does not overwrite existing keys). Public API: POST /v1/variables.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | The variable key (cannot be changed later). | |
| value | Yes | The variable value. | |
| locked | No | Hide the value like a password in the UI. | |
| secret | No | Mark as secret — value becomes write-only after creation. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations provide destructiveHint=true. Description adds that it modifies the account, is additive, and specifies the API endpoint. Gives useful context beyond the annotation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences: first states core action emphatically, second adds key behavioral detail and API endpoint. No wasted words, front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers modification, additive nature, and account-level scope. Lacks explanation of return value or error cases (e.g., key collision). Acceptable given schema coverage and annotations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description does not add extra meaning beyond schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states it creates a new account-level environment variable. Verb 'creates' and resource 'environment variable' are specific. Sibling tools like checkly_list_variables are for listing, so distinction is clear.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Describes additive nature (does not overwrite) but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites mentioned. Adequate but lacks explicit guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools target distinct resources (checks, groups, results, statuses, etc.). However, `checkly_get_check_alerts` vs `checkly_list_check_alerts` could be confused, though descriptions help clarify per-check vs account-level.
All tools follow a consistent `checkly_verb_noun` pattern, using `get`, `list`, and `create` appropriately. No mixing of styles.
22 tools cover a broad monitoring domain reasonably well, but a few resource types (e.g., dashboards, snippets, runtimes) with only list operations may be underutilized.
The tool set is heavily read-only; only maintenance windows and variables have create operations. Missing create/update/delete for checks, groups, alert channels, and other core resources, limiting agent ability to manage the account.