Forget it - there's no such thing.
UL is the reason. Manufacturers approached UL about creating just that, and UL said no - mainly the interest is in the industrial space. Why? As soon as you provide some sort of programmatic API for a GFCI or really any other protective device... some jackass will come along and write a script which automatically resets it! It's an obvious thing to do. Very soon, this would become normalized - nobody would want any other kind, for obvious reasons.
Well, that would utterly defeat the purpose. There would no longer be any consequence to a protective device trip, so no one would ever repair the underlying problems.
An example is Eaton's Remote Control breaker. It's not what it sounds like. It's a regular breaker alongside a remote control (motorized) on/off switch, in a circuit breaker package. You can remote-control the on/off switch, but cannot remotely reset the breaker. That is UL rules affecting the design. It's made for applications like big-box stores wired to use the breakers to turn their lights on, but now want to remote-control that.
So no, you're not going to find such a thing, at least not legitimately.
Altering is easy enough, though.
A number of products do this. It's dog simple: the device contacts a server in the cloud every minute if all is well. If this heartbeat signal is not heard for X minutes, the server messages you.
The correct answer is to work the problem seriously
The mistake here is to write it off as "the underground wires" and not check for any of the other things it could be.
For instance, for troubleshooting purposes, you could relocate the GFCI protection so the underground wire run is no longer protected, and the GFCI protects only wiring and appliances at the shed (or whatever). The appliances are still GFCI protected, but we have excluded that suspect wiring run. If the trips keep happening, then the wiring was not at fault and there's faulty wiring or appliances in the shed, and you can narrow down further from there.