Skip to main content
Glama

Power Automate MCP Server by Flow Studio

by io.github.ninihen1
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

trigger_live_flow

Run a flow on demand — the same as the maker portal's "Run flow" button. Works with Request triggers (HTTP request, manual Button, PowerApps) and with scheduled RECURRENCE flows, which run immediately; a scheduled flow takes no inputs, so passing body to one is refused. Pass trigger inputs as body. Automated connector triggers only fire from their source event.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyNoJSON body to POST to the trigger URL. Omit for flows that expect an empty body.
flowNameYesName (ID) of the flow.
connectionsNoOnly for a flow whose connections are provided by whoever runs it. Map of connection-reference name to the connection id to run it with, e.g. {"shared_office365users":"shared-office365user-…"}. Omit unless the result told you the connection picked was wrong; ids come from list_live_connections.
environmentNameYesName of the Power Platform environment.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / connections
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only for a flow whose connections are provided by whoever runs it. Map of connection-reference name to the connection id to run it with, e.g. {\"shared_office365users\":\"shared-office365user-…\"}. Omit unless the result told you the connection picked was wrong; ids come from list_live_connections.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations mark this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent action with open-world effects. The description adds useful behavioral detail: it triggers execution, refuses body for scheduled flows, and notes the trigger-type limitation. No contradiction with annotations. Slight gap: it doesn't mention what happens if the flow run fails, but that's minor.

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?

Four sentences, all purposeful, with the core purpose front-loaded and the trigger-type constraint stated early. No redundancy; each sentence adds distinct 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the tool's action, constraints, and parameter nuances adequately. It could have mentioned what the tool returns (e.g., a run ID), but that's not required without an output schema. The description is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that body carries trigger inputs and is refused for scheduled flows, and clarifies connections are for flows whose connections are provided by the runner. This goes beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 ('Run a flow on demand') and resource (a live flow), and references the maker portal's 'Run flow' button as an analogy. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cancel/resubmit by focusing on triggering execution, and clarifies which trigger types it applies to.

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?

Explicitly says it works with Request triggers and scheduled recurrence flows, and that automated connector triggers only fire from their source event—so agents know when not to use it. It also warns that passing body to a scheduled flow is refused, preventing a common misuse.

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

All Power Automate MCP Server by Flow Studio toolsInspect
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