tlly

Run job now

run_job_now

Destructive

Run a scheduled fetch job immediately, store any new points, and return the run result.

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": {
      "job_id": "<job_id>"
    },
    "name": "run_job_now"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`job_id`	Yes	id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the useful facts that it fetches from an external source and persists new points. However, for a non-idempotent, destructive, open-world operation the description never says what 'destructive' means here (duplicate points? overwritten data?), whether it can be re-run safely, or what happens if a run is already in progress.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

One sentence, front-loaded with the action, then effects, then return value. Nothing wasted.

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 'return the run result' gestures at but does not describe the return payload (success/failure, points added, errors). For a destructive, non-idempotent, open-world mutation this leaves meaningful gaps despite the compact one-param surface.

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 100% but the single job_id property is described only as 'id'. The description's phrasing ('a scheduled fetch job') implies job_id identifies an existing job, adding marginal meaning. Baseline 3 given full schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb ('Run ... immediately') and resource (scheduled fetch job) plus the two side effects: storing new points and returning the run result. It is clear what the tool does, though it never mentions the obvious sibling test_job, which an agent could easily confuse with an immediate run.

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?

'Immediately' implies the trigger-now use case versus scheduled execution, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no mention of test_job as the dry-run alternative, and no prerequisites (does the job need to exist/be enabled?). Usage is only inferable.

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

All tlly 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.