Rolli MCP

list_agent_schedule_runs

Retrieve a Rolli Agent schedule's full execution history with a preview of each linked agent run for auditing and run tracking.

Instructions

List the full execution history of a Rolli Agent schedule, including a preview of each linked agent run.

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": "list_agent_schedule_runs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	Schedule UUID
`limit`	No	Page size (default: 50, max: 100)
`offset`	No	Pagination offset (default: 0)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.5.0Nov 4, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

addedInput schema / properties / id / pattern

Added value: +"^([0-9a-fA-F]{8}-[0-9a-fA-F]{4}-[1-8][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[89abAB][0-9a-fA-F]{3}-[0-9a-fA-F]{12}|00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000|ffffffff-ffff-ffff-ffff-ffffffffffff)$"

addedInput schema / properties / offset / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```

Addedv1.3.0Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden: "List" implies a non-mutating read, and "full execution history... preview of each linked agent run" usefully signals a truncated summary per run rather than full run payloads. It says nothing about result ordering, whether pagination is needed to obtain the "full" history, or rate/permission requirements.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource comes first and the return-content note follows. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list tool with three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves ordering and the interaction between "full execution history" and the paginated limit/offset interface unexplained. It also does not clarify whether the embedded run previews require a separate get_agent_run call for detail.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100% (id, limit, offset all documented with defaults and bounds), so the schema already does the parameter work. The description adds no format, filtering, or sorting semantics beyond it. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ("List") and a specific resource ("execution history of a Rolli Agent schedule"), which cleanly separates it from list_agent_schedules/get_agent_schedule even though no sibling is named. It also notes the payload includes a preview of each linked agent run, so an agent knows what comes back. Sibling differentiation is implied by the resource scope rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied: this is the tool to reach for when you need the run history of one schedule, and the required `id` parameter reinforces that. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to get_agent_run for full run details or to list_agent_schedules for the schedules themselves.

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