GitHub MCP Server

trigger_workflow

Run GitHub Actions workflows by triggering dispatch events with specified inputs and branches for automated repository tasks.

Instructions

Trigger a workflow dispatch event to run a workflow.

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": {
      "owner": "<owner>",
      "repo": "<repo>",
      "workflow_id": "<workflow_id>",
      "ref": "<ref>"
    },
    "name": "trigger_workflow"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`owner`	Yes	Repository owner
`repo`	Yes	Repository name
`workflow_id`	Yes	Workflow ID or filename (e.g. 'deploy.yml')
`ref`	Yes	Branch or tag to run the workflow on
`inputs`	No	Workflow input parameters as key-value pairs

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 8, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('trigger a workflow dispatch event') but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as required permissions, whether this is a destructive/mutative operation, rate limits, or what happens when triggered (e.g., async execution, error handling). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (triggering workflows with 5 parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and incomplete behavioral disclosure, it doesn't fully compensate for the lack of structured safety or usage context, leaving room for improvement.

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 the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no extra context on parameter usage or relationships), meeting the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the verb ('trigger') and resource ('workflow dispatch event'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'cancel_workflow_run' or 'list_workflow_runs', which would require more specificity about what 'trigger' entails versus other workflow operations.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'cancel_workflow_run' and 'list_workflows', there's no indication of when triggering is appropriate versus canceling or listing, nor any prerequisites or context for usage.

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

Deploy Server