Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Clipwright

Clipwright

by seocombat
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Start a paid workflow run

run_workflow_plan

Launch an approved paid workflow run by passing its quote's launch data unchanged, then poll get_run. If delivery is uncertain, retry with the original idempotency key to avoid double payment.

Instructions

Start one approved paid workflow run: pass its quote's launch object unchanged; poll get_run. Never auto-approve, auto-quote or invent a key: if delivery is uncertain, repeat with the original key; a new key can pay twice. Price: the price of the native run it starts, make_ugc or make_faceless, as its quote states it. Quote first with quote_workflow_plan.

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": {
      "plan_id": "<plan_id>",
      "revision": "<revision>",
      "content_digest": "<content_digest>",
      "semantic_input_digest": "<semantic_input_digest>",
      "quote_id": "<quote_id>",
      "idempotency_key": "<idempotency_key>"
    },
    "name": "run_workflow_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
plan_idYes
quote_idYes
revisionYes
content_digestYes
idempotency_keyYes
semantic_input_digestYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.39.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / properties / revision / maximum
      Removed value: -9007199254740991
  2. Addedv0.29.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries the real behavioral burden and does: it discloses the monetary consequence ('Price: the price of the native run it starts'), the double-charge risk of a fresh idempotency key, and the requirement to pass the quote's launch object unchanged. It stops short of saying what happens on partial failure or what the run's terminal states are beyond 'poll get_run'.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its scope, then cost, then the safety constraint, then the prerequisite. Nearly every clause earns its place, though 'pass its quote's launch object unchanged' is compressed to the point of ambiguity for a six-parameter schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a paid, non-idempotent-by-default mutation with no output schema, the definition covers what matters most to an agent: prerequisite quoting, cost, retry semantics, and where to observe results. Return-value details are legitimately delegated to get_run.

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% across six required parameters, so the description must explain them and largely does not: plan_id, revision, content_digest and semantic_input_digest get no meaning at all. It covers idempotency_key well ('repeat with the original key; a new key can pay twice') and implies quote_id via 'its quote', but 'pass its quote's launch object unchanged' names an object that does not exist in the schema (additionalProperties: false), which risks confusing the caller about what to actually send.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Start one approved paid workflow run') and pins the scope ('one', 'approved', 'paid'), which cleanly separates it from prepare_workflow_plan, approve_workflow_plan, quote_workflow_plan and get_run. An agent can place it in the workflow lifecycle without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit ordering ('Quote first with quote_workflow_plan'), an explicit follow-up ('poll get_run'), and explicit exclusions ('Never auto-approve, auto-quote'). It even covers the retry case with the condition that selects it ('if delivery is uncertain, repeat with the original key').

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