Skip to main content
Glama
jupiterbak

AYX-MCP-Wrapper

by jupiterbak

update_schedule_name_or_comment

Modify schedule names or comments by ID to maintain accurate documentation and organization of automated tasks in Alteryx workflows.

Instructions

Update a schedule name or comment by its ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
schedule_idYes
nameYes
commentYes

Implementation Reference

  • Registers the MCP tool by decorating the handler function with @self.app.tool(), which delegates to the implementation in self.tools.
    @self.app.tool()
    def update_schedule_name_or_comment(schedule_id: str, name: str, comment: str):
        """Update a schedule name or comment by its ID"""
        return self.tools.update_schedule_name_or_comment(schedule_id, name, comment)
  • The core handler function that implements the tool logic: fetches the current schedule, constructs an UpdateScheduleContract with updated name/comment, calls the Alteryx API to update, and returns formatted response or error.
    def update_schedule_name_or_comment(self, schedule_id: str, name: str, comment: str):
        """Update the name or comment of 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=name if name else schedule.name,
                comment=comment if comment else schedule.comment,
                priority=schedule.priority,
                worker_tag=schedule.worker_tag,
                enabled=schedule.enabled,
                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?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is an update operation, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or what happens if only one field is provided (since both name and comment are required in schema). This leaves significant 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 that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a simple update tool, with zero waste or redundancy.

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 mutation nature, 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial context such as error handling, response format, or behavioral details, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 'by its ID' which hints at the schedule_id parameter, but doesn't explain the name or comment parameters beyond their titles. No details on format, constraints, or interactions (e.g., if both must be updated simultaneously) are provided, failing to add meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 ('Update') and the target resource ('a schedule name or comment'), specifying it's done by ID. It distinguishes from siblings like 'update_collection_name_or_owner' by focusing on schedules, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from similar tools like 'update_workflow_name_or_comment' beyond the resource type.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing schedule ID), exclusions (e.g., cannot update both fields at once if that's a constraint), or comparisons to siblings like 'get_schedule_by_id' for viewing or 'activate_schedule' for state changes.

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