Skip to main content
Glama
jupiterbak

AYX-MCP-Wrapper

by jupiterbak

remove_schedule_from_collection

Remove a scheduled workflow from an Alteryx collection by specifying both collection and schedule IDs. This tool helps manage automated workflow execution within collections.

Instructions

Remove a schedule from a collection by its ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
collection_idYes
schedule_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that implements the tool logic: validates collection and schedule existence, calls the Alteryx collections API to remove the schedule, and returns the formatted API response.
    def remove_schedule_from_collection(self, collection_id: str, schedule_id: str):
        """Remove a schedule from a collection by its ID"""
        try:
            collection = self.collections_api.collections_get_collection(collection_id)
            if not collection:
                return "Error: Collection not found"
            schedule = self.schedules_api.schedules_get_schedule(schedule_id)
            if not schedule:
                return "Error: Schedule not found"
            api_response = self.collections_api.collections_remove_schedule_from_collection(collection_id, schedule_id)
            return pprint.pformat(api_response)
        except ApiException as e:
            return f"Error: {e}"
  • MCP server tool registration decorator that exposes the handler as an MCP tool and delegates execution to the tools instance method.
    @self.app.tool()
    def remove_schedule_from_collection(collection_id: str, schedule_id: str):
        """Remove a schedule from a collection by its ID"""
        return self.tools.remove_schedule_from_collection(collection_id, schedule_id)
  • Tool description in the system prompt defining the tool's purpose.
    - remove_schedule_from_collection: Remove a schedule from a collection
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states a destructive action ('Remove'), implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions required, whether the removal is reversible, effects on related assets, or error conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 that front-loads the core action. Every word contributes to the purpose without waste, making it appropriately sized for the tool's 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 a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context, parameter details, and usage guidelines, making it insufficient for safe and effective agent invocation despite its conciseness.

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

Parameters2/5

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 mentions parameters 'by its ID' (implying collection_id and schedule_id), but adds no meaning beyond the schema's property names. No details on ID formats, sources, or constraints are provided, failing to address the coverage gap.

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 ('Remove') and target resources ('a schedule from a collection'), specifying it's done 'by its ID'. It distinguishes from sibling 'add_schedule_to_collection' by indicating the opposite operation, though it doesn't explicitly mention other siblings like 'remove_workflow_from_collection' for full differentiation.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., schedule must be active or in the collection), exclusions, or compare with other tools like 'deactivate_schedule' or 'delete_collection', leaving usage context unclear.

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