Fine Structure

Create Agent Trigger

create_agent_trigger

Add a trigger that starts the agent with these instructions: event (event_type such as lead.created, with an optional source), schedule (a schedule object) or watch. Each start is a run under the agent's permissions and uses agent credits. Its approval rules stay as set in Fine Structure, and a webhook trigger, whose URL is a secret, is made on the agent's screen.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "agent_id": "<agent_id>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "create_agent_trigger"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`source`	No
`status`	No		active
`agent_id`	Yes	The agent id, from list_agents.
`schedule`	No	For trigger_type schedule or watch: the same shape as in schedule_agent_task, e.g. {"type":"daily","time":"08:30","timezone":"Asia/Jerusalem"}.
`event_type`	No
`instructions`	No
`trigger_type`	No		event

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive, open-world create. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: each start consumes agent credits and runs under the agent's permissions, approval rules remain governed by 'Fine Structure', and a webhook trigger's URL is a secret surfaced on the agent's screen. That credit and approval-rule disclosure is valuable and non-obvious.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, but it is one long run-on sentence mixing trigger enumeration, billing, approval, and webhook-secret notes. The clause about a webhook trigger 'made on the agent's screen' is awkward and the 'Fine Structure' reference is unexplained, costing clarity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For an 8-parameter, open-world creation tool with a nested schedule object and no output schema, the description covers trigger-type mechanics and side effects well but is silent on what is returned, how name/status affect behavior, and what errors to expect. Adequate, not complete.

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?

With only 25% schema description coverage across 8 parameters, the description carries real weight and does explain event_type with a concrete example ('lead.created'), the optional source, and the schedule object's role. However, name, status, and instructions are only glanced at ('with these instructions'), leaving several parameters undocumented in both places.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a concrete verb and resource ('Add a trigger that starts the agent') and enumerates the three trigger flavors (event, schedule, watch), which an agent can map to the trigger_type enum. It does not name its nearest siblings (update_agent_trigger, create_whatsapp_trigger, run_agent_trigger_now), so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The three trigger types give an implied selection rule, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not statement and no mention of alternatives such as update_agent_trigger for existing triggers or create_whatsapp_trigger for the WhatsApp-specific path. An agent has to infer routing from the sibling list.

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

All Fine Structure tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?