Tulina

apify_run

Start an actor WITHOUT waiting for it — for scrapes longer than 300 s.

Returns — {data: {id, status, defaultDatasetId, …}} — keep id for apify_run_status and defaultDatasetId for apify_dataset_items.

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": {
      "actor_id": "<actor_id>"
    },
    "name": "apify_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`_org`	No	Org (id) de CET APPEL. `oto_list_orgs()`.
`_group`	No	Équipe (id) de CET APPEL, sous son org parente.
`_run_id`	No	OBLIGATOIRE à chaque appel dès `run_start` ou `data_claim_next` : sans lui, l'écriture sur une ligne réservée est refusée. Hérité seulement si le serveur tient un run actif — n'y compte pas.
`_project`	No	Projet (id) de CET APPEL — jeton PRIMAIRE. `oto_project(op='list')`.
`actor_id`	Yes
`_instance`	No	Instance de connecteur PRÉCISE (un credential exact). `oto_instance(op='list')`.
`max_items`	No
`run_input`	No
`timeout_secs`	No
`memory_mbytes`	No
`wait_for_finish`	No	seconds to wait before returning (max 60) — enough to catch a short run without polling.
`max_total_charge_usd`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden; it does disclose the asynchronous, fire-and-forget nature and the returned fields (id, status, defaultDatasetId) with what to do with them next. It says nothing about billing exposure (max_total_charge_usd), timeouts, failure modes, or what run_input/max_items change about the result, which matters for a paid scraping job.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Short, front-loaded, and every clause carries information: purpose, scope, return shape, and follow-up handles. The mid-sentence line breaks make it slightly harder to scan, but nothing is redundant.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description partially fills that gap by naming key return fields and their downstream consumers. Against 12 parameters with half undocumented, including cost and resource controls, it leaves an agent guessing on the inputs that govern spend and run size.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 50%, and the description explains zero parameters — actor_id, run_input, max_items, timeout_secs, memory_mbytes, and max_total_charge_usd are undocumented in both places. The description spends its words on the response shape instead of compensating for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Start an actor') plus the key differentiator 'WITHOUT waiting for it', which immediately separates it from the synchronous sibling apify_run_sync. It also names the two follow-up tools, so an agent can place it in a workflow without opening a schema.

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?

Provides a concrete selection threshold ('for scrapes longer than 300 s') and implies the alternative when a run is short. It does not explicitly name apify_run_sync as the choice for short runs, nor does it warn when not to use this tool, so the routing is clear but not fully closed.

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

All Tulina tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?