Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

RunLater

by app.runlater
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Schedule a POST, PUT, PATCH or DELETE request

schedule_send_request
Destructive

Create one schedule that sends a POST, PUT, PATCH or DELETE to a public URL later, with an optional body: once at an exact time (run_at) or repeatedly (cron). Pass exactly one of run_at or cron. Nothing is sent now. The URL is one the person supplies; RunLater does not limit it to a particular API. At the scheduled time RunLater sends it, which can change data at that URL, retries failures and logs every run. Returns the schedule with its id and next run time. Docs: https://runlater.app/docs/mcp

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "schedule_send_request"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic http(s) URL to call. Private and local addresses are refused.
bodyNoRequest body as text (JSON goes here as a string). Not sent on DELETE.
cronNoRecurring: 5-field cron (minute hour day-of-month month day-of-week), for example "0 9 * * 1" for Mondays at 9am. Omit for one-time.
nameNoShort label shown in the dashboard. Default: method and host.
methodNoHTTP method. Default POST.
run_atNoOne-time: ISO date and time, for example 2026-12-01T09:00:00 (read in timezone) or 2026-12-01T14:00:00Z. Omit for recurring.
headersNoRequest headers, for example [{"name":"Authorization","value":"Bearer abc"}]. Values are never shown back.
retriesNoRetries after a failed attempt, with exponential backoff. Default 3.
timezoneNoIANA time zone for run_at without an offset and for cron, for example America/New_York. Default UTC.
timeout_secondsNoSeconds to wait for a response. Default 30.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint, openWorldHint, and non-idempotency, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real substance by stating the request is deferred, may mutate data at the target URL, retries failures, and logs every run. It stops short of covering permissions or how a scheduled job can later be cancelled or paused via siblings.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and constraint, then side effects, then return value, with no filler. It is slightly dense for the amount of content, but every sentence carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 10-parameter mutation tool, the description covers the essential framing plus the return value ("the schedule with its id and next run time") even though no output schema exists. Defaults and formats are delegated to the rich schema, which is appropriate; only the when-to-use routing against siblings 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 baseline is 3 and the schema already explains run_at, cron, headers, timezone, and retries in detail. The description does add one genuine cross-parameter rule not encoded in the schema (exactly one of run_at or cron, no oneOf present), but otherwise adds little meaning beyond the field descriptions.

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 specific verb and resource: "Create one schedule that sends a POST, PUT, PATCH or DELETE to a public URL later." The enumeration of methods implicitly separates it from the sibling schedule_get_request, but it never names that sibling, so differentiation is inferential 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?

It gives a hard usage constraint ("Pass exactly one of run_at or cron") and clarifies deferral ("Nothing is sent now"). However, it never routes the agent among the many siblings — no guidance on when to prefer schedule_get_request, run_now, or list_schedules — so the when-to-use story is only implied.

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

All RunLater toolsInspect
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