GoClaw MCP Server

goclaw_cron_update

Modify scheduled task configurations for AI gateway automation, including timing, agent assignments, and execution parameters.

Instructions

Update a cron job's settings

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "goclaw_cron_update"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Cron job ID
`name`	No
`expression`	No
`agent_id`	No
`message`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Mar 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. 'Update' implies a mutation, but it doesn't disclose required permissions, whether updates are partial or complete, if changes are reversible, error conditions, or what happens to unspecified fields. It lacks crucial context 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 action, though its brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 5 parameters (4 undocumented), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the update behavior, parameter roles, or expected outcomes, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty about how to invoke it correctly.

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 low (20%), with only the 'id' parameter documented. The description doesn't compensate by explaining what 'name', 'expression', 'agent_id', or 'message' represent, their formats, constraints, or which are optional. It adds no meaning beyond the bare schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update a cron job's settings' clearly states the verb (update) and resource (cron job), but it's vague about what 'settings' encompasses. It distinguishes from obvious siblings like 'goclaw_cron_create' and 'goclaw_cron_delete', but doesn't specify how it differs from 'goclaw_cron_toggle' or what aspects of a cron job can be updated.

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., needing an existing cron job ID), when to choose update over delete+create, or how it relates to sibling tools like 'goclaw_cron_toggle' for enabling/disabling jobs.

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

Deploy Server