Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Rundeck MCP Server

Rundeck MCP Server

by vanisoul
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

run_job

Execute a Rundeck job by specifying job ID and optional parameters to start an automated workflow.

Instructions

執行作業

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": "run_job"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes作業 ID
optionsNo作業選項（可選，JSON 格式）

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond executing a job. With no annotations, it fails to inform about side effects, synchronous/asynchronous nature, or required permissions, making it insufficient for safe invocation.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very concise but at the expense of important details. While it avoids fluff, it lacks necessary information for a tool of this complexity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and behavioral details, the description is grossly insufficient. It does not explain options, return values, or error handling, leaving an AI agent with minimal guidance.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the two parameters.

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 '執行作業' clearly conveys the verb (execute) and resource (job). It is not a tautology and effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_job_info or list_jobs which involve different actions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_job_info or list_executions. The description lacks context about prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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