Skip to main content
Glama
informatics-isi-edu

Deriva MCP Server

Official

create_execution

Initialize an ML workflow run by creating an execution record, linking input datasets and assets for provenance tracking. Supports dry-run mode for testing without catalog writes.

Instructions

Create a new execution to track an ML workflow run with provenance.

This is the first step in the execution lifecycle. Specify input datasets and assets to establish provenance - these will be recorded as inputs to this workflow run.

LIFECYCLE (follow in order):

  1. create_execution() - You are here

  2. start_execution() - Begin timing

  3. [Run your ML workflow]

  4. stop_execution() - End timing

Args: workflow_name: Descriptive name (e.g., "ResNet50 Training Run 3"). workflow_type: Type from Workflow_Type vocabulary (e.g., "Training", "Inference"). description: What this execution does and why. dataset_rids: Input dataset RIDs for provenance tracking. asset_rids: Input asset RIDs for provenance tracking. dry_run: If True, download input datasets/assets but skip creating execution records in the catalog and skip uploading results. Useful for testing data loading, configuration, and model initialization without writing to the catalog.

Returns: JSON with execution_rid, workflow_rid, dataset_count, asset_count, dry_run.

Example: create_execution("CIFAR Training", "Training", "Train ResNet on CIFAR-10", ["1-ABC"]) create_execution("Test Run", "Training", "Debug data loading", dry_run=True)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dry_runNo
asset_ridsNo
descriptionNo
dataset_ridsNo
workflow_nameYes
workflow_typeYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that inputs are recorded as provenance, and explains dry_run behavior (download inputs but skip creating execution records and uploading results). It also mentions the JSON return fields. However, it doesn't disclose potential prerequisites like an active catalog or whether a workflow is auto-created, so it's slightly incomplete.

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 clear sections (lifecycle, args, returns, examples) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. While somewhat lengthy, every section adds useful info (especially the examples). It could be slightly trimmed (e.g., the lifecycle block repeats the 'first step' idea), but it remains focused.

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?

The description covers all 6 parameters, explains lifecycle ordering, provides return value structure, and includes examples. It lacks mention of prerequisites like catalog connection or valid workflow_type values, but given the output schema is partially described and the description is thorough, it is nearly complete for a tool of this complexity.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so with an Args section that explains each parameter meaningfully: workflow_name is a descriptive name, workflow_type comes from a vocabulary, dataset_rids and asset_rids are for provenance tracking, and dry_run has a detailed explanation of its side effects. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 purpose: 'Create a new execution to track an ML workflow run with provenance.' It uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('execution'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning itself as 'the first step in the execution lifecycle' with references to start_execution and stop_execution.

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?

The description explicitly provides a LIFECYCLE list that tells the agent when to call this tool (step 1) and what to do next (start_execution, run workflow, stop_execution). It also explains the dry_run use case for testing without writing to the catalog, giving clear contextual guidance.

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/informatics-isi-edu/deriva-mcp'

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