OutSend

Create and start pipeline

create_pipeline

Create AND start a multi-step pipeline (e.g. scrap → emails → verify_emails). Chains are linear: each block feeds the next. Edges use the keys "from" and "to" (not source/target). Valid block types and config fields are described by get_pipeline_schema. Returns pipeline id + initial job ids. Example definition: {"nodes": [{"id": "n1", "type": "scrap", "config": {"queries": ["plombier"], "zones": ["Lyon"], "stop_at": 500}}, {"id": "n2", "type": "emails", "config": {}}], "edges": [{"id": "e1", "from": "n1", "to": "n2"}]}

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "definition": "<definition>"
    },
    "name": "create_pipeline"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No
`definition`	Yes	{nodes: [{id, type, config}], edges: [{id, from, to}]} — edge keys are "from"/"to", not source/target
`low_priority`	No	The pipeline's jobs run after other jobs in the queue. A low-priority pipeline costs less.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / low_priority

Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "The pipeline's jobs run after other jobs in the queue. A low-priority pipeline costs less.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedSep 12, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real behavior: the pipeline is started on creation, chains are strictly linear, and the call returns pipeline id plus initial job ids. The 'from'/'to' key gotcha is a useful implementation detail. It does not cover rate limits, auth, or failure behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then constraints, then the schema pointer, then a single example. Dense but every element earns its place; the example is the right length for a nested-object payload.

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?

No output schema exists, so stating the return value (pipeline id + initial job ids) is necessary and present. For a nested-object mutation with a sibling schema-lookup tool, the description supplies enough to construct a call, though a note on whether jobs are charged or how to track them would complete the picture.

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?

With 67% schema coverage the schema documents the definition shape and low_priority, but the description compensates for the weaker spots by showing a full worked example and explicitly warning that edge keys are 'from'/'to' not source/target. Only the 'name' parameter is unaddressed anywhere.

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?

Starts with a specific verb+resource ('Create AND start a multi-step pipeline') and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling job-creators by naming it a pipeline of chained blocks. The example definition makes the resource concrete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It routes the agent to get_pipeline_schema for valid block types and config fields, which is a genuine alternative/dependency pointer. It does not, however, say when to choose a pipeline over sibling tools like create_scrap_job or create_enrichment_job, so the exclusion set is left implicit.

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

All OutSend 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?