Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Clipwright

Clipwright

by seocombat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Get run status

get_run
Read-only

Check a run's status by run_id; use wait_seconds to wait for completion, then poll again while IN_PROGRESS until it returns SUCCEEDED or FAILED.

Instructions

Status of any run by run_id. wait_seconds holds the answer; while IN_PROGRESS call again with poll.arguments until SUCCEEDED or FAILED.

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": {
      "run_id": "<run_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
run_idYes
wait_secondsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.45.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / wait_seconds / description
      Removed value: -"Wait up to this many seconds (at most 50) for the run to end before answering."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.39.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / properties / wait_seconds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Wait up to this many seconds (at most 50) for the run to end before answering.",
+  "maximum": 50,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. First observedv0.20.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare it a safe read; the description adds the genuinely useful behavior of a long-poll loop and the terminal status values. The phrase 'poll.arguments' is unexplained jargon that weakens an otherwise solid disclosure, and there is no mention of backoff or failure-mode behavior.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose before the polling instruction. No filler, but the second sentence compresses the polling contract so aggressively that it becomes ambiguous.

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?

With no output schema, the description should say what a status response contains beyond the three named states. It covers the polling loop but leaves the return shape and any intermediate/error states unstated for a run-tracking tool.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It implies run_id is the run identifier and that wait_seconds controls how long the call blocks, but 'holds the answer' is cryptic and it never says what wait_seconds actually waits for, its unit, or that a zero value returns immediately.

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 pair ('Status of any run by run_id'), which clearly separates it from siblings like get_run_shots or run_workflow_plan. The 'any run' phrasing signals generality across run types, though it does not explicitly name a sibling it supersedes.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete when-to-use guidance: call while IN_PROGRESS, repeat until SUCCEEDED or FAILED, and use wait_seconds to block. It stops short of naming an alternative tool or stating when not to poll (e.g. terminal states need no wait).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools