Skip to main content
Glama
jupiterbak

AYX-MCP-Wrapper

by jupiterbak

activate_schedule

Activate a schedule by its ID to enable automated workflow execution in Alteryx Server.

Instructions

Activate a schedule by its ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schedule_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registers the MCP tool 'activate_schedule' using the @app.tool() decorator. This function serves as the entry point for the tool invocation, delegating execution to the underlying tools.activate_schedule method.
    @self.app.tool()
    def activate_schedule(schedule_id: str):
        """Activate a schedule by its ID"""
        return self.tools.activate_schedule(schedule_id)
  • Core implementation of activate_schedule tool logic. Fetches the current schedule details, constructs an UpdateScheduleContract with enabled=True, updates the schedule via the Alteryx Server API, and returns the formatted response.
    def activate_schedule(self, schedule_id: str):
        """Activate a schedule by its ID"""
        try:
            schedule = self.schedules_api.schedules_get_schedule(schedule_id)
            if not schedule:
                return "Error: Schedule not found"
            
            contract = server_client.UpdateScheduleContract(
                workflow_id=schedule.workflow_id,
                owner_id=schedule.owner_id,
                iteration=schedule.iteration,
                name=schedule.name,
                comment=schedule.comment,
                priority=schedule.priority,
                worker_tag=schedule.worker_tag,
                enabled=True,
                credential_id=schedule.credential_id,
                time_zone=schedule.time_zone,
                questions=schedule.questions,
            )
            api_response = self.schedules_api.schedules_update_schedule(schedule_id, contract)
            return pprint.pformat(api_response)
        except ApiException as e:
            return f"Error: {e}"
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Activate') but doesn't explain what activation entails, whether it requires specific permissions, if it's reversible, what side effects occur, or what the response looks like. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple operation and front-loads the essential information about what the tool does.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete behavioral context, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'activate' means operationally, what happens after activation, or how this differs from related tools like 'deactivate_schedule', leaving the agent with inadequate information for proper use.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With only 1 parameter and 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by specifying that activation requires a schedule ID. While it doesn't provide format details or validation rules, it correctly identifies the single required parameter's purpose, which is adequate given the minimal parameter count.

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 clearly states the action ('Activate') and target resource ('a schedule by its ID'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'deactivate_schedule' or explain what 'activate' means in this context, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'deactivate_schedule' or other schedule-related tools. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, consequences, or appropriate contexts for activation, leaving the agent with insufficient usage direction.

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/jupiterbak/AYX-MCP-Wrapper'

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