queue_runProcess a specified Drupal queue by name, optionally limiting the number of items handled. Executes pending queue tasks manually or in automated workflows.
Run a specific queue.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| queue_name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does very little. 'Run' implies an action that consumes/processes queue items, but there is no disclosure of side effects, whether items are deleted on failure, whether the call blocks until the queue is drained, or what permissions are needed.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single short sentence with no wasted words, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. One sentence cannot carry a mutation tool with two undocumented parameters.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Although an output schema exists (so return values need not be described), the definition omits the essentials for a mutating queue-processing tool with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter documentation. An agent cannot reliably determine scope, side effects, or the meaning of 'limit'.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% for both parameters. The description implies a queue identifier is required (mapping loosely to queue_name), but it never explains the expected naming/format, and the 'limit' parameter (default 100) is entirely unaddressed in either the schema or the description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a verb ('Run') and a resource ('a specific queue'), which distinguishes it by verb from siblings like queue_list, queue_create, queue_info, and queue_delete. However, 'run' is left undefined for a Drupal queue context — it does not clarify whether it processes all queued items, drains the queue, or executes a worker once.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternative tools such as queue_list or cron_run. The agent must infer context entirely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.