RunWhen Platform MCP

Create Chat Rule

create_chat_rule

Create a chat rule in RunWhen Platform to automate chat responses. Specify name, scope type, workspace, and markdown content.

Instructions

Create a chat rule. Uses AgentFarm internal API.

Skill: runwhen-skill://manage-rules (scoping + wording guidance).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Human-readable name for the rule.
`scope_id`	No	Scope ID (null for platform; workspace name for workspace).
`is_active`	No	Whether the rule is active.
`scope_type`	Yes	One of platform, org, workspace, persona, user.
`rule_content`	Yes	Markdown content of the rule.
`workspace_name`	Yes	The workspace to create the rule in (e.g. 't-oncall').

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only says it uses an internal API. It is silent on required permissions, whether creation is idempotent, and any side effects. The skill reference is the only behavioral clue, and it is not elaborated.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with the action front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though arguably terse given the tool's 6 parameters and lack of annotations.

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?

An output schema and full parameter coverage handle returns and inputs, but for a create/mutation tool with no annotations the description should disclose auth requirements and side effects. It leaves the agent without the behavioral context needed to invoke safely.

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%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description adds no syntax, format, or relational detail beyond that, so it neither compensates nor detracts.

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+resource combination ('Create a chat rule') that an agent can grasp immediately, and the AgentFarm API note localizes it. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling create_chat_command or explain why one creates a rule versus updates one via update_chat_rule.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternatives. The pointer to 'runwhen-skill://manage-rules (scoping + wording guidance)' hints at supporting context but does not tell the agent when this tool is the right choice versus update_chat_rule or create_chat_command.

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

Deploy Server