Skip to main content
Glama
ComplianceCow

ComplianceCow MCP Server

schedule_asset_execution

Schedule automated execution for a compliance asset by defining a cron-based schedule and assessment control period.

Instructions

Schedule automated execution for a asset.

IMPORTANT WORKFLOW & SAFETY RULES:

  • User inputs (runPrefixName, cronTab) are mandatory and cannot be bypassed or assumed.

  • The cronTab string MUST be constructed explicitly from the user's schedule instructions (e.g., frequency, time-of-day, timezone). Never auto-generate it without user confirmation.

  • controlPeriod MUST be one of the supported values.

  • controlDuration MUST be a positive integer provided by the user. Args:

    • assetId (str): Id of the asset to be scheduled.

    • runPrefixName (str): Human-readable name/prefix for this scheduled run.

    • description (str): Description for the scheduled run.

    • cronTab (str): Full cron expression including timezone (e.g. TZ=Asia/Calcutta 0 0 * * *), explicitly provided/confirmed by the user. Must not be assumed or defaulted.

    • controlPeriod (str): Control period for the assessment run, type selected by the user. Allowed values: - DAY → Last few days - WEEK → Last few weeks - MONTH → Last few months - CAL_WEEK → Last few calendar weeks - CAL_MONTH → Last few calendar months

    • controlDuration (int): Duration count for the selected control period Returns:

    • success (bool): Indicates if the schedule was created successfully.

    • scheduleId (str): ID of the created schedule (only present if successful).

    • error (Optional[str]): An error message if any issues occurred during creation.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assetIdYes
runPrefixNameYes
descriptionYes
cronTabYes
controlPeriodYes
controlDurationYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It covers the return values (success, scheduleId, error) but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether the schedule starts immediately, if it can overwrite existing schedules, or if validation occurs). The input constraints are detailed, but behavioral aspects are lacking.

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?

The description is well-structured with a header, bullet points, and a clear args list. It is somewhat repetitive (cronTab requirements appear twice) and could be more concise, but the organization aids readability.

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 (6 required params, no annotations, output schema referenced), the description covers inputs and outputs well. It lacks edge-case behavior (e.g., duplicate schedules) and could elaborate on error scenarios, but overall provides sufficient context for an AI agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides detailed semantics for all 6 parameters, including examples (e.g., cronTab format with timezone), allowed values for controlPeriod, and type requirements. This fully clarifies the parameters beyond the raw schema.

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 tool's function: 'Schedule automated execution for a asset'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_asset_schedule and list_asset_schedules by focusing on creation. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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?

The description includes a dedicated 'IMPORTANT WORKFLOW & SAFETY RULES' section that mandates user input and provides explicit instructions for constructing cronTab and selecting controlPeriod/controlDuration. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like delete_asset_schedule.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ComplianceCow/cow-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server