Skip to main content
Glama

XDaLa Workflow Builder

by io.github.xgr-network

Create operation handoff

create_operation_handoff
Idempotent

Create an offchain human-in-the-loop operation and return a browser URL. The MCP never signs or submits transactions; the user executes locally with a browser wallet on the operation page. Do not use this tool to start, run, launch, execute, or queue XDaLa sessions. Do not use this tool for xgr_validateDataTransfer, SessionPermit, Manage Sessions imports, xgr-session-start@1, XDaLa session start handoffs, or starting a deployed XRC-729 workflow. For these intents, use create_xdala_session_start_handoff. If create_xdala_session_start_handoff is unavailable, report that the session-start tool is unavailable instead of falling back to create_operation_handoff.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesOperation or handoff type identifier.
stepsNoOrdered workflow or operation steps included in the handoff.
policyNoPolicy metadata controlling human review, approval or execution constraints.
chainIdYesNumeric EVM chain id for the target network.
networkYesTarget network name or environment, for example mainnet or devnet.
payloadNoStructured payload object for an XDaLa step or workflow request.
summaryNoStructured summary metadata for human review and audit context.
ttlSecondsNoTime-to-live in seconds for temporary offchain handoff data.
validationNoValidation metadata or validation result object for the handoff.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesStructured result data returned by the XGR MCP gateway.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate it's not read-only, not destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that the MCP never signs or submits transactions and that users execute locally with a browser wallet. This clarifies the offchain nature and user involvement, going beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is efficient with 5 sentences, front-loading the main purpose and behavior. It is well-structured but could potentially be slightly more concise without losing clarity.

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 the tool's complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, output schema), the description covers purpose, behavior, and usage guidelines adequately. It does not elaborate on return structure but an output schema exists. The description is sufficient for an agent to decide when to use the tool.

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 input schema already provides parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add additional semantics for parameters, staying at baseline.

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 clearly states the verb 'Create', the resource 'offchain human-in-the-loop operation', and the return value 'browser URL'. It also distinguishes itself from similar tools by explicitly stating what it is not for and naming the alternative tool 'create_xdala_session_start_handoff'.

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?

Provides explicit instructions on when not to use this tool (XDaLa sessions, etc.) and directs to the correct sibling tool, including a fallback instruction if that tool is unavailable. This is exemplary guidance.

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

All XDaLa Workflow Builder toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

There are many overlapping session-listing tools (list_xdala_sessions, get_recent_xdala_sessions, find_latest_xdala_session, list_xdala_session_ids, get_latest_session_payload) and duplicate validation tools (validate_xdala_bundle is an alias for validate_xgr_multibundle). Descriptions help but boundaries are still unclear.

Naming Consistency4/5

The verb_noun snake_case pattern is consistent across nearly all tools (get_, list_, create_, cancel_, validate_). Minor inconsistencies include the alias validate_xdala_bundle and interchangeable verbs like get_ vs read_ vs resolve_ for similar read operations.

Tool Count1/5

With 95 tools, this is far beyond the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. While the domain is broad, the sheer number makes the tool surface unwieldy and difficult for an agent to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations: handoffs, session queries, transaction exploration, contract reads, validation, gas requests, and purchases. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct workflow editing tools), but overall the surface is remarkably complete.

Resources