ctrl_fire_manual
Manually fire a workflow once. Keeper picks up within ~5s. Use to test a workflow without waiting for its natural trigger.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflowId | Yes |
Manually fire a workflow once. Keeper picks up within ~5s. Use to test a workflow without waiting for its natural trigger.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflowId | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds timing detail ('Keeper picks up within ~5s') and implies one-time action. No annotations exist, so description carries burden. Lacks details on idempotency or side effects but provides useful behavioral context.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, no wasted words, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Adequate for a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema. Provides purpose, usage guidance, and a timing guarantee. Missing parameter explanation slightly reduces completeness.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single parameter workflowId has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain its purpose or format beyond the schema. The description should compensate for the missing schema descriptions but does not.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states 'Manually fire a workflow once' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like ctrl_activate and ctrl_create_workflow by focusing on manual firing for testing.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says 'Use to test a workflow without waiting for its natural trigger,' providing clear context for when to use. Does not list when not to use or alternatives, but context is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct operation: vault activation, workflow creation, manual firing, catalog retrieval, log reading, and vault status. No two tools have overlapping responsibilities.
All tools follow a consistent 'ctrl_verb' pattern (e.g., ctrl_activate, ctrl_create_workflow), making it easy to infer functionality from the name.
6 tools cover the essential operations for a workflow automation server without being excessive or sparse. The scope is well-defined.
The set covers core workflows (create, activate, trigger, monitor) but lacks explicit update/delete for workflows or vaults. This is a minor gap that can be worked around.