Skip to main content
Glama
EasyDeploy-AI

easydeploy-ai-mcp

Official

Start model training

submit_training_job
Destructive

Starts a model training job for a model version, using one training credit and returning a job ID to track completion.

Instructions

Submit a training job for a model version.

Each call starts a separate training job and spends one training credit; get_training_status follows a job already submitted, by its job_id.

Track completion: Poll list_model_versions for the model and watch the target version's status until it reaches TRAINING_COMPLETED or TRAINING_FAILED (same as the web UI). This is the most reliable approach across MCP hosts.

Or pass the returned jobId to get_training_status with wait=true to block until the job finishes. Run time depends on the plan and the data, from minutes to several hours.

dataset_version_id can be omitted when the model version was created with create_model_version in the same flow — the backend resolves target_feature, file, and dataset from the model version record automatically. Omit it to train on the model version's own dataset. Pass it only to override with a different qa_cleaned or training version: an explicit dataset_version_id whose version_type is raw (every upload starts as raw) is rejected with 400 INVALID_VERSION_TYPE.

Returns {jobId, modelVersionId, status}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
model_version_idYes
dataset_version_idNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations mark it destructive/non-idempotent, and the description adds genuinely new context: each call spends one training credit, every call starts a separate job, runtime ranges from minutes to hours, and passing a 'raw' dataset_version_id is rejected with 400 INVALID_VERSION_TYPE. This goes well beyond the safety hints.

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 core action and cost, then well-sectioned guidance for tracking and the optional param. It is longer than strictly necessary but each block (tracking, dataset_version_id rules) earns its space.

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?

For a credit-spending, non-idempotent mutation the description covers cost, idempotency implications, tracking paths, and parameter edge cases, and even echoes the return shape despite an output schema existing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it explains dataset_version_id in depth (omission behavior, override semantics, backend resolution, raw rejection). model_version_id is only implicitly defined by the tool's purpose, so one of the two params lacks explicit semantics.

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 ('Submit a training job for a model version') that an agent can distinguish from siblings like get_training_status and create_model_version. The description immediately clarifies that this starts a job versus the siblings that follow or set up one.

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 routes the agent: this call starts a job and spends a credit, while get_training_status follows an already-submitted job by job_id. It also gives precise conditions for omitting vs passing dataset_version_id and names the alternative flow, leaving nothing to inference.

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