Skip to main content
Glama
biswasbiplob

mwaa-mcp-server

by biswasbiplob
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

trigger-dag-run

Trigger a new DAG run in Amazon MWAA using the DAG ID, with optional configuration and logical date, to start workflow execution on demand.

Instructions

Trigger a new DAG run.

    Creates a new DAG run for the specified DAG. Optionally pass configuration
    and a logical date.

    Requires the --allow-write flag.

    Args:
        ctx: The MCP context.
        environment_name: Name of the MWAA environment.
        dag_id: The DAG identifier to trigger.
        conf: Optional configuration dict for the DAG run.
        logical_date: Optional logical date in ISO 8601 format.
        region: AWS region override.
        profile_name: AWS CLI profile name override.

    Returns:
        CallToolResult with the triggered DAG run details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confNoOptional JSON configuration to pass to the DAG run.
dag_idYesThe DAG ID to trigger.
regionNoAWS region override.
logical_dateNoOptional logical date for the DAG run (ISO 8601 format).
profile_nameNoAWS CLI profile name override.
environment_nameNoName of the MWAA environment. If omitted and only one environment exists, it is used automatically.

Tool Definition Quality

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral requirement (requires --allow-write flag) and states the return type (CallToolResult with DAG run details). It does not cover side effects or failure modes, but for a trigger operation this is reasonably transparent.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear one-sentence purpose, a note about the required flag, an Args list, and a Returns section. Every element serves a purpose without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a tool with 6 parameters.

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?

Despite no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the required --allow-write flag, all parameters, and the return type. It could be more verbose about error handling, but the current level is sufficient for a straightforward trigger operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all parameters. The description's Args section merely lists the parameter names without adding new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It adds minimal value beyond grouping conf and logical_date as optional.

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 ('Trigger a new DAG run') and expands on it ('Creates a new DAG run for the specified DAG'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-dag-runs, get-dag-run, and pause-dag, which have different purposes.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for triggering a new run, and notes that it requires the --allow-write flag. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternative tools or state when not to use it. The implied usage is strong, but explicit exclusions are absent.

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/biswasbiplob/mwaa-mcp-server'

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