Tessryx

Create schedule

create_schedule

Schedule authoring — create a BRAND-NEW schedule (mints the schedule + its version 1). The definition names a workflow (versioned-slug ref, published/latest), a recurrence (EITHER a 5-field cron + IANA timezone, OR an 'every N minutes/hours' interval), and an optional static input bound as the workflow's $input on every fire; fetch its JSON Schema with get_schedule_definition_schema and author against it. Pass publish=true to activate it (start firing) in one step, or publish later with publish_schedule. (To add a version to a schedule that already exists, use create_schedule_version.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`slug`	Yes	Unique per-tenant slug; hierarchical path segments allowed (e.g. reports/daily-summary).
`publish`	No	If true, immediately publish the version this call creates (the common create-then-publish in one step). Defaults to false; omit to leave the version as an unpublished draft.
`definition`	Yes	The schedule definition, as a JSON object. Fetch the exact JSON Schema it must satisfy with get_schedule_definition_schema and author against it (or copy an existing one with the get_*_version tool). The owning service validates it on submit.
`description`	No	What this schedule does (human + LLM-facing prose).
`display_name`	No	Human-readable name.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`slug`	Yes
`version`	Yes
`published`	Yes
`schedule_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 7, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description transparently discloses the creation action, the optional immediate publication, and validation by the owning service. It aligns with the readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false annotations and adds context about the workflow definition and $input binding.

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?

The description is dense but well-organized, using parentheticals to separate key details (e.g., workflow reference, recurrence, publish behavior). No redundant or filler content; every sentence adds functional value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (nested object, multiple related tools), the description is fully self-contained. It explains how to author the definition, how to handle publication, and how it differs from sibling tools like create_schedule_version and publish_schedule, leaving no significant gap for a caller.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Every parameter is described in detail, including the nested 'definition' object which explicitly instructs fetching the JSON Schema via get_schedule_definition_schema. The 'publish' parameter's default and behavior are clearly stated, and the schema covers all five parameters.

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 it creates a brand-new schedule (mints schedule and version 1) and contrasts it with create_schedule_version for adding versions to existing schedules. The specific verb 'create' and resource 'schedule' are unambiguous.

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 directs when to use this tool versus create_schedule_version ('To add a version to a schedule that already exists, use create_schedule_version') and explains the publish parameter for one-step activation versus using publish_schedule later.

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

All Tessryx 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?