Skip to main content
Glama
iEfoam

CocosMCP

by iEfoam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

执行工作流

cocos_workflow_execute
Destructive

Execute planned workflow steps in sequence, stopping on failure to return completed steps and compensation hints.

Instructions

按顺序执行已规划能力；默认遇到失败即停止，并返回已完成步骤和补偿提示

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stepsYes
projectIdYes
workflowIdNo
continueOnErrorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.1.0-build.8.073d0f2
    • addedInput schema / $defs
      Added value: +{
+  "__schema0": {
+    "anyOf": [
+      {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      {
+        "type": "null"
+      },
+      {
+        "items": {
+          "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      {
+        "additionalProperties": {
+          "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+        },
+        "propertyNames": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      }
+    ]
+  }
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / paramRefs
      Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {
+    "properties": {
+      "path": {
+        "minLength": 1,
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "step": {
+        "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+        "minimum": 0,
+        "type": "integer"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "step",
+      "path"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "propertyNames": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / runtimeRef
      Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "path": {
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "step": {
+      "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "step",
+    "path"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / steps / items / properties / waitFor
      Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "equals": {
+      "$ref": "#/$defs/__schema0"
+    },
+    "intervalMs": {
+      "maximum": 5000,
+      "minimum": 10,
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "path": {
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "timeoutMs": {
+      "maximum": 30000,
+      "minimum": 1,
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "path",
+    "equals"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds value by disclosing failure behavior ('默认遇到失败即停止') and return information (completed steps and compensation hints). It does not contradict annotations and provides context beyond the structured data.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and key behavior with no extraneous words. It is concise and well-structured for a tool of this nature.

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 the tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested schema, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It omits details on how to structure steps, the meaning of continueOnError, how to reference prior step outputs, and what the compensation hints look like. An agent would struggle to construct a valid request without additional schema descriptions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters such as steps, projectId, continueOnError, or workflowId. The nested structure of steps (with fields like paramRefs, waitFor, capabilityId) remains completely undocumented, leaving the agent without essential guidance for correct invocation.

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 executes planned capabilities in sequence, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cocos_workflow_plan (planning) and cocos_capability_execute (single capability) by emphasizing '已规划能力' (planned capabilities) and sequential execution.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for pre-planned workflows via '已规划能力', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like cocos_capability_execute or cocos_workflow_plan. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided; the guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools