Skip to main content
Glama

adaptorch_run

Launches orchestrated task-DAG runs by submitting payloads to the AdaptOrch control plane and optionally waits for terminal results.

Instructions

Submit a task payload to AdaptOrch control-plane and optionally wait.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "adaptorch_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modelNoModel ID, or 'auto' on control-plane backends to resolve this tenant's provider default or confirmed run history. Provider credentials are still required.
promptNo
contextNo
payloadNoTask DAG. subtasks is required and non-empty; dependencies may be omitted.
budget_policyNo
connector_nameNomcp
synthesis_modeNoSynthesis strategy executed by the installed engine. Supported modes: paper, robust, robust_lite, stable_hybrid. Deprecated aliases resolve to a supported mode: fourier_aggressive -> stable_hybrid. The serving-layer value 'auto' asks the control plane to pick a supported engine mode per run (control-plane backends only; the choice is reported via synthesis_mode_used). Hosted callers that omit the field receive robust.robust
timeout_secondsNo
ensemble_membersNoBYOK request-scoped ensemble fan-out: 2-5 'provider:model' members riding the process provider credential (ADAPTORCH_MCP_PROVIDER, ADAPTORCH_MCP_PROVIDER_MODEL, ADAPTORCH_MCP_PROVIDER_API_KEY). Quota: one run debits one unit regardless of member count; model token cost bills to the caller's own provider account.
output_extractorNoEnsemble output extraction mode hint. Engine extractors: final_answer, multiple_choice_letter. Use 'none' to request no extractor; it is not forwarded to the engine.
wait_for_terminalNo
poll_interval_secondsNo
prefer_ensemble_singletonNoHint the router to prefer multi_model_ensemble for single-node DAGs. true = explicit on, false = explicit off (the ensemble auto preference will not re-enable it), null/omitted = auto policy.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (not read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, not destructive). The description adds the behavioral detail that the call can optionally wait for completion, which is useful context beyond annotations, but it does not disclose side effects, quota consumption, or authentication requirements.

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 single sentence is front-loaded with the core action and contains no filler. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a tool of this complexity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 13 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and only partial schema descriptions, the description is far too thin. It does not explain the run lifecycle, payload structure, or return behavior, leaving an agent with significant gaps.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The tool has 13 parameters and only 46% schema description coverage, yet the description mentions only 'task payload' and 'optionally wait'. It fails to compensate for the uncovered parameters such as prompt, context, budget_policy, connector_name, timeout_seconds, and poll_interval_seconds.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('Submit') and resource ('task payload to AdaptOrch control-plane'), and it is the only submission tool among siblings that are get/list/cancel/metrics tools. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate against those siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description offers no when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. It mentions optional waiting but does not explain when to wait versus poll or how to choose among the many parameters.

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