Skip to main content
Glama
EasyDeploy-AI

easydeploy-ai-mcp

Official

Run prediction

run_prediction

Run a single ad-hoc prediction against a trained model version, returning the predicted label, value, or class probabilities. Optionally return at once and poll for results.

Instructions

Run a single ad-hoc prediction against a trained model version.

Each call is a new prediction and spends a prediction credit; get_prediction follows one still running, by its prediction_id.

project_id and target_feature are auto-resolved from the model version record when omitted. By default waits and returns the predicted label or value in output. For a classifier the result also has probabilities, one {"probability_<class>": p} object per entry of output, named like run_batch_prediction's CSV columns, and classLabels, the label each <class> stands for: {"0": "B", "1": "M"} for a text target, {"0": 0, "1": 1} for a 0/1 target. output follows the model's default rule, so a threshold you chose applies to the probability, not to output. Regressors return neither. Set wait_for_result=false to return immediately with prediction_id. A wait lasts max_wait_seconds (45 s by default, at most 60 s); if the prediction is still running then, the result has timed_out: true and next_steps: poll get_prediction to keep waiting.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
input_dataYes
project_idNo
target_featureNo
wait_for_resultNo
max_wait_secondsNoWith wait_for_result=true, how long to wait, in seconds (default 45, at most 60; larger values are clamped). Hosts end long tool calls at different times, some at 60 s, so the default returns well before that; poll get_prediction to keep waiting.
model_version_idYes
poll_interval_secondsNoSeconds between status checks while waiting (default 2.0). Values below 2 are raised to 2.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.4.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_wait_seconds / default
      Previous value: -150New value: +45
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_wait_seconds / description
      Previous value: -"With wait_for_result=true, how long to wait, in seconds (default 150). Values above 150 are clamped to 150 so the call returns before MCP hosts end it (about 3 minutes); poll get_prediction to keep waiting."New value: +"With wait_for_result=true, how long to wait, in seconds (default 45, at most 60; larger values are clamped). Hosts end long tool calls at different times, some at 60 s, so the default returns well before that; poll get_prediction to keep waiting."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_wait_seconds / default
      Previous value: -90New value: +150
    • addedInput schema / properties / max_wait_seconds / description
      Added value: +"With wait_for_result=true, how long to wait, in seconds (default 150). Values above 150 are clamped to 150 so the call returns before MCP hosts end it (about 3 minutes); poll get_prediction to keep waiting."
    • addedInput schema / properties / poll_interval_seconds / description
      Added value: +"Seconds between status checks while waiting (default 2.0). Values below 2 are raised to 2."
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Rich disclosure beyond annotations: notes a prediction credit is spent, output format for classifiers vs regressors, how probabilities and classLabels are structured, that output uses the model's default rule, the max_wait_seconds clamp and timeout behavior with 'timed_out' and 'next_steps' returned. Annotations only provide basic hints like readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false; the description adds substantial operational detail.

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-loads the main action and key details, then elaborates on output and waiting behavior. Some sentences are long and dense, but every sentence contributes useful information. Slightly verbose but appropriate for a complex tool.

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 tool with 7 params, nested input_data, and an output schema, the description covers all critical aspects: required params, auto-resolution, output format for classifiers/regressors, timeout behavior, and alternative tool usage. The output schema is present but the description still adds value by explaining the output structure's meaning.

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 only 29%, so description must compensate. It explains model_version_id is required (implied), that project_id and target_feature are auto-resolved when omitted, and the semantics of wait_for_result and max_wait_seconds. However, it does not clarify input_data structure or poll_interval_seconds beyond what's in the 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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Run a single ad-hoc prediction against a trained model version.' Clearly distinguishes it from run_batch_prediction (single vs batch) and from get_prediction (which 'follows one still running, by its prediction_id').

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 describes when to use it versus get_prediction: 'Each call is a new prediction and spends a prediction credit; get_prediction follows one still running.' Also explains the wait_for_result flag to choose between immediate and blocking behavior.

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