Skip to main content
Glama

Project Manage Tool

project_manage
Destructive

Manage project lifecycles and schedules for recurring or one-shot workflow runs. Create, update, activate, or archive projects, and trigger runs immediately.

Instructions

Projects — recurring (continuous) or one-shot containers that schedule workflow runs against goals. Continuous projects spawn ProjectRuns on the configured cadence (cron-style or natural language); one-shot projects fire once on trigger_run. Lifecycle states: draft → active → (paused | archived). Each run reserves budget independently.

Actions:

  • list / get (read).

  • create (write) — name, type (one_shot | continuous), workflow_id.

  • update (write) — project_id + any creatable field.

  • activate / pause / resume / restart (write) — project_id. Lifecycle transitions.

  • trigger_run (write — costs credits) — project_id. Dispatches a single run immediately.

  • archive (write) — project_id. Stops scheduling and hides from default lists; reversible via restart.

  • schedule (write) — project_id, frequency or cron expression.

  • schedule_nlp (write) — project_id, natural language schedule (e.g. "every weekday at 9am"). Calls LLM, costs credits.

  • run_list (read) — project_id; optional limit, status filter.

  • run_get (read) — project_id, run_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
actionYesAction to perform: list, get, create, update, activate, pause, resume, restart, trigger_run, archive, schedule, schedule_nlp, run_list, run_get
deadline_msNoOptional: max wall-clock time (ms) the tool may spend. If exceeded during the call, returns a DEADLINE_EXCEEDED error. Minimum 100 ms. Leave unset for no deadline.
statusNoFilter by status: draft, active, paused, completed, archived, failed
typeNoFilter by type: one_shot, continuous
limitNoMax results to return (default 10, max 100)
project_idYesThe project UUID
titleYesProject title
descriptionNoProject description
goalNoProject goal
execution_modeNoExecution mode: autonomous (full tool access) or watcher (read-only tools only). Default: autonomousautonomous
workflow_idNoUUID of an active workflow to run for each project execution. The workflow must be in active status.
crew_idNoUUID of a crew to run for each project execution. Alternative to workflow_id.
allowed_tool_idsNoRestrict which tools agents can use in this project. Pass an array of tool UUIDs. Empty = all team tools allowed.
allowed_credential_idsNoRestrict which credentials are available to agents in this project. Pass an array of credential UUIDs.
scheduleNoSchedule configuration. Required for continuous projects — omitting it creates a project that never runs. Use project_schedule_nlp to parse natural language schedules.
operationYesget: read schedule details | update: change schedule settings | enable: turn on the schedule | disable: turn off the schedule
run_idYesThe project run UUID
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description reveals that trigger_run costs credits, schedule_nlp calls an LLM, and archive is reversible. This adds useful behavioral context without contradicting the annotation.

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 clear first sentence and bullet-pointed actions. It is appropriately sized for the complexity, though slightly verbose in places.

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 and lack of output schema, the description covers lifecycle states, actions, and side effects fairly completely. It could briefly mention return types for read actions, but overall it provides sufficient context.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already describes parameters fully. The description adds minor value by grouping actions and mentioning 'project_id + any creatable field' for update, but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 identifies the tool as managing project containers for scheduling workflows, with a comprehensive list of actions. It distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on project lifecycle and scheduling.

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 for each action (e.g., 'write' vs 'read') and includes important notes like cost for trigger_run and LLM usage for schedule_nlp. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when not to use this tool.

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/escapeboy/agent-fleet-o'

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