SwishrJobs

Cron checker: validate expressions and flag never-firing schedules

submit_cron_expression_check

Idempotent

Validate 5-field cron expressions, name the field that is out of range, and flag the day-of-month and day-of-week combination that most implementations treat as 'either', so a schedule that never fires is caught. Choose this to validate 5-field cron expressions, to have an out-of-range field named, and to catch the day-of-month plus day-of-week combination that most implementations treat as 'either' and that makes a job never fire. Do not choose this when you need the next fire time or a timezone conversion; it validates field syntax only. Example requests: Check these cron expressions for mistakes. | Why does this cron job never run? Here are the expressions. | Validate my cron scheduled jobs before I deploy them.

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": {
      "inputs": "<inputs>",
      "authorized_by": "<authorized_by>"
    },
    "name": "submit_cron_expression_check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`inputs`	Yes
`quote_id`	No	The quote_id returned by POST /v1/jobs. Required to authorize a priced capability; the service rejects a priced job that does not name the quote it issued.
`authorized_by`	Yes	Identifier of the human or agent authorizing this job.
`accepted_price`	No	The amount accepted, exactly as quoted (for example "5.00" or 5). Checked against the stored quote, so a price that moved between quote and authorize is refused rather than silently absorbed. Optional, but sent to make the acceptance explicit.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`quote`	No
`state`	Yes
`job_id`	Yes
`artifacts`	No
`access_token`	No	Per-job credential. Present it as the X-Job-Token header to read the job or list it. Keep it; it is the only credential for this job.
`verification`	No	Independent verification. verification.ok = false means the job failed, not a partial success.
`capability_id`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description adds real scope limits beyond the annotations (syntax-only, no next-fire computation, catches never-firing schedules). However, it omits the most consequential behavioral trait: this is a priced job that requires a quote and an authorizing party, which the annotations' readOnlyHint=false hints at but never explains. It also says nothing about what the validation result looks like beyond the flagged field.

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 opening sentence is strong and front-loaded, but the 'Choose this to...' sentence restates the same three capabilities almost verbatim, and three example requests repeat the same idea. Roughly a third of the text is redundant padding.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the description fully covers what the tool checks and what it refuses to check. The gap is the submission/pricing workflow implied by quote_id, accepted_price, and authorized_by, which the description never mentions.

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 coverage is 75%, so the schema already documents content, quote_id, authorized_by, and accepted_price. The description adds only an implicit hint that 'content' should hold cron expressions ('Check these cron expressions... Here are the expressions') and says nothing about the quote/price authorization flow, leaving the two required-but-non-obvious parameters unexplained.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Validate 5-field cron expressions') and pins down two concrete behaviors: naming an out-of-range field and flagging the day-of-month/day-of-week 'either' trap. It explicitly scopes itself as field-syntax-only, which separates it from any scheduler or timezone sibling in the list.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives both sides of the routing decision: 'Choose this to validate 5-field cron expressions...' and 'Do not choose this when you need the next fire time or a timezone conversion.' The three example requests further anchor the intended use cases in user phrasing.

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

All SwishrJobs 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?