Javascript Object Notation (JSON): http://json.org
JSON Linked Data (JSON-LD): http://json-ld.org
YAML: http://yaml.org
Avro: https://avro.apache.org/docs/1.8.1/spec.html
Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) Generic Syntax: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986)
Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs): https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987
Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX.1-2008): http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/
Resource Description Framework (RDF): http://www.w3.org/RDF/
XDG Base Directory Specification: https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-0.6.html
This document describes CWL syntax, execution, and object model. It is not intended to document a CWL specific implementation, however it may serve as a reference for the behavior of conforming implementations.
The terminology used to describe CWL documents is defined in the Concepts section of the specification. The terms defined in the following list are used in building those definitions and in describing the actions of a CWL implementation:
may: Conforming CWL documents and CWL implementations are permitted but not required to behave as described.
must: Conforming CWL documents and CWL implementations are required to behave as described; otherwise they are in error.
error: A violation of the rules of this specification; results are undefined. Conforming implementations may detect and report an error and may recover from it.
fatal error: A violation of the rules of this specification; results are undefined. Conforming implementations must not continue to execute the current process and may report an error.
at user option: Conforming software may or must (depending on the modal verb in the sentence) behave as described; if it does, it must provide users a means to enable or disable the behavior described.
deprecated: Conforming software may implement a behavior for backwards compatibility. Portable CWL documents should not rely on deprecated behavior. Behavior marked as deprecated may be removed entirely from future revisions of the CWL specification.
An object is a data structure equivalent to the "object" type in JSON, consisting of a unordered set of name/value pairs (referred to here as fields) and where the name is a string and the value is a string, number, boolean, array, or object.
A document is a file containing a serialized object, or an array of objects.
A process is a basic unit of computation which accepts input data, performs some computation, and produces output data. Examples include CommandLineTools, Workflows, and ExpressionTools.
An input object is an object describing the inputs to an invocation of a process.
An output object is an object describing the output resulting from an invocation of a process.
An input schema describes the valid format (required fields, data types) for an input object.
An output schema describes the valid format for an output object.
Metadata is information about workflows, tools, or input items.
CWL documents must consist of an object or array of objects represented using JSON or YAML syntax. Upon loading, a CWL implementation must apply the preprocessing steps described in the Semantic Annotations for Linked Avro Data (SALAD) Specification. An implementation may formally validate the structure of a CWL document using SALAD schemas located at https://github.com/common-workflow-language/cwl-v1.1/
Note: This section is non-normative.
type: array<ComplexType> | map<
key_field, ComplexType>
The above syntax in the CWL specifications means there are two or more ways to write the given value.
Option one is a array and is the most verbose option.
Option one generic example:
some_cwl_field:
- key_field: a_complex_type1
field2: foo
field3: bar
- key_field: a_complex_type2
field2: foo2
field3: bar2
- key_field: a_complex_type3
Option one specific example using Workflow.inputs:
array<InputParameter> | map<
id,type| InputParameter>
inputs:
- id: workflow_input01
type: string
- id: workflow_input02
type: File
format: http://edamontology.org/format_2572
Option two is enabled by the map<…> syntax. Instead of an array of entries we
use a mapping, where one field of the ComplexType (here named key_field)
becomes the key in the map, and its value is the rest of the ComplexType
without the key field. If all of the other fields of the ComplexType are
optional and unneeded, then we can indicate this with an empty mapping as the
value: a_complex_type3: {}
Option two generic example:
some_cwl_field:
a_complex_type1: # this was the "key_field" from above
field2: foo
field3: bar
a_complex_type2:
field2: foo2
field3: bar2
a_complex_type3: {} # we accept the defualt values for "field2" and "field3"
Option two specific example using Workflow.inputs:
array<InputParameter> | map<
id,type| InputParameter>
inputs:
workflow_input01:
type: string
workflow_input02:
type: File
format: http://edamontology.org/format_2572
Option two specific example using SoftwareRequirement.packages:
array<SoftwarePackage> | map<
package,specs| SoftwarePackage>
hints:
SoftwareRequirement:
packages:
sourmash:
specs: [ https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00027 ]
screed:
version: [ "1.0" ]
python: {}
` Sometimes we have a third and even more compact option denoted like this:
type: array<ComplexType> | map<
key_field,field2| ComplexType>
For this example, if we only need the key_field and field2 when specifying
our ComplexTypes (because the other fields are optional and we are fine with
their default values) then we can abbreviate.
Option three generic example:
some_cwl_field:
a_complex_type1: foo # we accept the default value for field3
a_complex_type2: foo2 # we accept the default value for field3
a_complex_type3: {} # we accept the default values for "field2" and "field3"
Option three specific example using Workflow.inputs:
array<InputParameter> | map<
id,type| InputParameter>
inputs:
workflow_input01: string
workflow_input02: File # we accept the default of no File format
Option three specific example using SoftwareRequirement.packages:
array<SoftwarePackage> | map<
package,specs| SoftwarePackage>
hints:
SoftwareRequirement:
packages:
sourmash: [ https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00027 ]
python: {}
What if some entries we want to mix the option 2 and 3? You can!
Mixed option 2 and 3 generic example:
some_cwl_field:
my_complex_type1: foo # we accept the default value for field3
my_complex_type2:
field2: foo2
field3: bar2 # we did not accept the default value for field3
# so we had to use the slightly expanded syntax
my_complex_type3: {} # as before, we accept the default values for both
# "field2" and "field3"
Mixed option 2 and 3 specific example using Workflow.inputs:
array<InputParameter> | map<
id,type| InputParameter>
inputs:
workflow_input01: string
workflow_input02: # we use the longer way
type: File # because we want to specify the "format" too
format: http://edamontology.org/format_2572
Mixed option 2 and 3 specific example using SoftwareRequirement.packages:
array<SoftwarePackage> | map<
package,specs| SoftwarePackage>
hints:
SoftwareRequirement:
packages:
sourmash: [ https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00027 ]
screed:
specs: [ https://github.com/dib-lab/screed ]
version: [ "1.0" ]
python: {}
Note: The map<…> (compact) versions are optional for users, the verbose option #1 is
always allowed, but for presentation reasons option 3 and 2 may be preferred
by human readers. Consumers of CWL must support all three options.
The normative explanation for these variations, aimed at implementors, is in the Schema Salad specification.
If an object contains an id field, that is used to uniquely identify the
object in that document. The value of the id field must be unique over the
entire document. Identifiers may be resolved relative to either the document
base and/or other identifiers following the rules are described in the
Schema Salad specification.
An implementation may choose to only honor references to object types for
which the id field is explicitly listed in this specification.
An implementation must resolve $import and $include directives as described in the Schema Salad specification.
Another transformation defined in Schema salad is simplification of data type definitions.
Type <T> ending with ? should be transformed to [<T>, "null"].
Type <T> ending with [] should be transformed to {"type": "array", "items": <T>}
Input metadata (for example, a sample identifier) may be represented within a tool or workflow using input parameters which are explicitly propagated to output. Future versions of this specification may define additional facilities for working with input/output metadata.
Implementation extensions not required for correct execution (for example,
fields related to GUI presentation) and metadata about the tool or workflow
itself (for example, authorship for use in citations) may be provided as
additional fields on any object. Such extensions fields must use a namespace
prefix listed in the $namespaces section of the document as described in the
Schema Salad specification.
It is recommended that concepts from schema.org are used whenever possible.
For the $schemas field we recommend their RDF encoding: https://schema.org/version/latest/schemaorg-current-https.rdf
Implementation extensions which modify execution semantics must be listed in
the requirements field.
A parameter is a named symbolic input or output of process, with an associated datatype or schema. During execution, values are assigned to parameters to make the input object or output object used for concrete process invocation.
A CommandLineTool is a process characterized by the execution of a standalone, non-interactive program which is invoked on some input, produces output, and then terminates.
A workflow is a process characterized by multiple subprocess steps, where step outputs are connected to the inputs of downstream steps to form a directed acylic graph, and independent steps may run concurrently.
A runtime environment is the actual hardware and software environment when executing a command line tool. It includes, but is not limited to, the hardware architecture, hardware resources, operating system, software runtime (if applicable, such as the specific Python interpreter or the specific Java virtual machine), libraries, modules, packages, utilities, and data files required to run the tool.
A workflow platform is a specific hardware and software implementation capable of interpreting CWL documents and executing the processes specified by the document. The responsibilities of the workflow platform may include scheduling process invocation, setting up the necessary runtime environment, making input data available, invoking the tool process, and collecting output.
A workflow platform may choose to only implement the Command Line Tool Description part of the CWL specification.
It is intended that the workflow platform has broad leeway outside of this specification to optimize use of computing resources and enforce policies not covered by this specification. Some areas that are currently out of scope for CWL specification but may be handled by a specific workflow platform include:
- Data security and permissions
- Scheduling tool invocations on remote cluster or cloud compute nodes.
- Using virtual machines or operating system containers to manage the runtime (except as described in DockerRequirement).
- Using remote or distributed file systems to manage input and output files.
- Transforming file paths.
- Pausing, resuming or checkpointing processes or workflows.
Conforming CWL processes must not assume anything about the runtime environment or workflow platform unless explicitly declared though the use of process requirements.
The generic execution sequence of a CWL process (including workflows and command line line tools) is as follows.
- Load input object.
- Load, process and validate a CWL document, yielding one or more process objects.
The
$namespacespresent in the CWL document are also used when validating and processing the input object. - If there are multiple process objects (due to
$graph) and which process object to start with is not specified in the input object (via acwl:toolentry) or by any other means (like a URL fragment) then choose the process with theidof "#main" or "main". - Validate the input object against the
inputsschema for the process. - Validate process requirements are met.
- Perform any further setup required by the specific process type.
- Execute the process.
- Capture results of process execution into the output object.
- Validate the output object against the
outputsschema for the process. - Report the output object to the process caller.
A process requirement modifies the semantics or runtime environment of a process. If an implementation cannot satisfy all requirements, or a requirement is listed which is not recognized by the implementation, it is a fatal error and the implementation must not attempt to run the process, unless overridden at user option.
A hint is similar to a requirement; however, it is not an error if an implementation cannot satisfy all hints. The implementation may report a warning if a hint cannot be satisfied.
Optionally, implementations may allow requirements to be specified in the input
object document as an array of requirements under the field name
cwl:requirements. If implementations allow this, then such requirements
should be combined with any requirements present in the corresponding Process
as if they were specified there.
Requirements specified in a parent Workflow are inherited by step processes
if they are valid for that step. If the substep is a CommandLineTool
only the InlineJavascriptRequirement, SchemaDefRequirement, DockerRequirement,
SoftwareRequirement, InitialWorkDirRequirement, EnvVarRequirement,
ShellCommandRequirement, ResourceRequirement are valid.
As good practice, it is best to have process requirements be self-contained, such that each process can run successfully by itself.
If the same process requirement appears at different levels of the
workflow, the most specific instance of the requirement is used, that is,
an entry in requirements on a process implementation such as
CommandLineTool will take precedence over an entry in requirements
specified in a workflow step, and an entry in requirements on a workflow
step takes precedence over the workflow. Entries in hints are resolved
the same way.
Requirements override hints. If a process implementation provides a
process requirement in hints which is also provided in requirements by
an enclosing workflow or workflow step, the enclosing requirements takes
precedence.
Parameter references are denoted by the syntax $(...) and may be used in any
field permitting the pseudo-type Expression, as specified by this document.
Conforming implementations must support parameter references. Parameter
references use the following subset of
Javascript/ECMAScript 5.1
syntax, but they are designed to not require a Javascript engine for evaluation.
In the following BNF grammar, character classes, and grammar rules are denoted in '{}', '-' denotes exclusion from a character class, '(())' denotes grouping, '|' denotes alternates, trailing '*' denotes zero or more repeats, '+' denote one or more repeats, '/' escapes these special characters, and all other characters are literal values.
| symbol:: | {Unicode alphanumeric}+ |
| singleq:: | [' (( {character - '} | \' ))* '] |
| doubleq:: | [" (( {character - "} | \" ))* "] |
| index:: | [ {decimal digit}+ ] |
| segment:: | . {symbol} | {singleq} | {doubleq} | {index} |
| parameter reference:: | $( {symbol} {segment}*) |
Use the following algorithm to resolve a parameter reference:
- Match the leading symbol as the key
- Look up the key in the parameter context (described below) to get the current value. It is an error if the key is not found in the parameter context.
- If there are no subsequent segments, terminate and return current value
- Else, match the next segment
- Extract the symbol, string, or index from the segment as the key
- Look up the key in current value and assign as new current value. If the key is a symbol or string, the current value must be an object. If the key is an index, the current value must be an array or string. It is an error if the key does not match the required type, or the key is not found or out of range.
- Repeat steps 3-6
The root namespace is the parameter context. The following parameters must be provided:
inputs: The input object to the current Process.self: A context-specific value. The contextual values for 'self' are documented for specific fields elsewhere in this specification. If a contextual value of 'self' is not documented for a field, it must be 'null'.runtime: An object containing configuration details. Specific to the process type. An implementation may provide opaque strings for any or all fields ofruntime. These must be filled in by the platform after processing the Tool but before actual execution. Parameter references and expressions may only use the literal string value of the field and must not perform computation on the contents, except where noted otherwise.
If the value of a field has no leading or trailing non-whitespace characters around a parameter reference, the effective value of the field becomes the value of the referenced parameter, preserving the return type.
If the value of a field has non-whitespace leading or trailing characters around a parameter reference, it is subject to string interpolation. The effective value of the field is a string containing the leading characters, followed by the string value of the parameter reference, followed by the trailing characters. The string value of the parameter reference is its textual JSON representation with the following rules:
- Leading and trailing quotes are stripped from strings
- Objects entries are sorted by key
Multiple parameter references may appear in a single field. This case must be treated as a string interpolation. After interpolating the first parameter reference, interpolation must be recursively applied to the trailing characters to yield the final string value.
An expression is a fragment of Javascript/ECMAScript 5.1 code evaluated by the workflow platform to affect the inputs, outputs, or behavior of a process. In the generic execution sequence, expressions may be evaluated during step 5 (process setup), step 6 (execute process), and/or step 7 (capture output). Expressions are distinct from regular processes in that they are intended to modify the behavior of the workflow itself rather than perform the primary work of the workflow.
Expressions in CWL are an optional feature and are not required to be implemented by all consumers of CWL documents. They should be used sparingly, when there is no other way to achieve the desired outcome. Excessive use of expressions may be a signal that other refactoring of the tools or workflows would benefit the author, runtime, and users of the CWL document in question.
To declare the use of expressions, the document must include the process
requirement InlineJavascriptRequirement. Expressions may be used in any
field permitting the pseudo-type Expression, as specified by this
document.
Expressions are denoted by the syntax $(...) or ${...}. A code
fragment wrapped in the $(...) syntax must be evaluated as a
ECMAScript expression. A
code fragment wrapped in the ${...} syntax must be evaluated as a
ECMAScript function body
for an anonymous, zero-argument function. Expressions must return a valid JSON
data type: one of null, string, number, boolean, array, object. Other return
values must result in a permanentFailure. Implementations must permit any
syntactically valid Javascript and account for nesting of parenthesis or braces
and that strings that may contain parenthesis or braces when scanning for
expressions.
The runtime must include any code defined in the "expressionLib" field of InlineJavascriptRequirement prior to executing the actual expression.
Before executing the expression, the runtime must initialize as global variables the fields of the parameter context described above.
The effective value of the field after expression evaluation follows the same rules as parameter references discussed above. Multiple expressions may appear in a single field.
Expressions must be evaluated in an isolated context (a "sandbox") which permits no side effects to leak outside the context. Expressions also must be evaluated in Javascript strict mode.
The order in which expressions are evaluated is undefined except where otherwise noted in this document.
An implementation may choose to implement parameter references by evaluating as a Javascript expression. The results of evaluating parameter references must be identical whether implemented by Javascript evaluation or some other means.
Implementations may apply other limits, such as process isolation, timeouts, and operating system containers/jails to minimize the security risks associated with running untrusted code embedded in a CWL document.
Javascript exceptions thrown from a CWL expression must result in a
permanentFailure of the CWL process.
By convention, a CWL document may begin with #!/usr/bin/env cwl-runner
and be marked as executable (the POSIX "+x" permission bits) to enable it
to be executed directly. A workflow platform may support this mode of
operation; if so, it must provide cwl-runner as an alias for the
platform's CWL implementation.
A CWL input object document may similarly begin with #!/usr/bin/env cwl-runner and be marked as executable. In this case, the input object
must include the field cwl:tool supplying an IRI to the default CWL
document that should be executed using the fields of the input object as
input parameters.
The cwl-runner interface is required for conformance testing and is
documented in cwl-runner.cwl.
To discover CWL documents look in the following locations:
For each value in the XDG_DATA_DIRS environment variable (which is a : colon
separated list), check the ./commonwl subdirectory. If XDG_DATA_DIRS is
unset or empty, then check using the default value for XDG_DATA_DIRS:
/usr/local/share/:/usr/share/ (That is to say, check /usr/share/commonwl/
and /usr/local/share/commonwl/)
Then check $XDG_DATA_HOME/commonwl/.
If the XDG_DATA_HOME environment variable is unset, its default value is
$HOME/.local/share (That is to say, check $HOME/.local/share/commonwl)
$XDG_DATA_HOME and $XDG_DATA_DIRS are from the XDG Base Directory
Specification