Ignix

Create an automation from a template

create_automation_from_template

Instantiate a template as a new flow, adapted to this business. overrides rewrites any field of any node (the greeting, the question, the tags, the buttons) and trigger replaces the trigger, so the flow comes out configured instead of generic. Call list_automation_templates first to see each node's id and current values. Created INACTIVE: review it with preview_automation and turn it on with set_automation_active.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Custom name. Optional.
`trigger`	No	Replace the trigger, e.g. {"type":"keyword","keywords":["price","info"]}. See get_automation_node_types for the shape of each trigger type.
`overrides`	No	Per-node field overrides keyed by node id, e.g. {"intro":{"text":"Hi! Want the price list?"},"tag":{"tags":["lead","summer"]}}. Only the fields you pass change; `id` and `type` cannot be changed. Node ids come from the template graph.
`templateId`	Yes	Id from list_automation_templates.
`workspaceId`	No	Workspace to work on (an id from list_workspaces). Not needed when this connection is tied to one workspace, or when you pass an account: the account's workspace is used.
`idempotencyKey`	No	Optional. A unique id for this action (16-128 chars: letters, digits, _ : . -). If you are unsure whether a call went through (timeout, network error), repeat it with the SAME idempotencyKey and the same arguments: you get the original result and nothing is done twice.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare it is non-read-only, non-idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the critical non-obvious behavior that the flow is Created INACTIVE, plus the prerequisite call and the two follow-up tools needed to finish the job. This is behavioral context beyond what annotations convey.

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?

Three sentences, purpose front-loaded, then parameter semantics, then the call sequence. No filler; each sentence carries distinct, actionable information.

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 a 6-param tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description covers prerequisites (list_automation_templates), post-creation state (inactive), and the activation path. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: overrides rewrites any field of any node (greeting, question, tags, buttons), and trigger replaces the trigger entirely, with the intent that "the flow comes out configured instead of generic." This is useful overlay beyond the schema's structural description.

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 precise verb+resource: "Instantiate a template as a new flow, adapted to this business." This clearly separates it from siblings like create_automation (blank flow) and duplicate_automation (copy of an existing flow). An agent knows exactly what the tool produces.

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 prescribes the workflow: call list_automation_templates first for node ids/values, review the created flow with preview_automation, then enable it via set_automation_active. It names the exact alternatives at each step rather than leaving sequencing to inference.

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

All Ignix 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?