Skip to main content
Glama

List schedules

list_schedules
Read-onlyIdempotent

The workspace's workflow schedules, or one workflow's: when each runs, whether it is on, why it is off, its inputs and how the last run went.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoHow many to return (default 20).
workflow_idNoOnly this workflow's schedules.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this a read-only, idempotent, closed-world, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantive behavioral value by disclosing the returned information model, including the disabled-reason and last-run-outcome fields, which tells the agent this doubles as a diagnostic surface rather than a bare enumerator.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a colon-bounded enumeration of returned fields; no filler. It is slightly dense and elliptical in places ('its inputs', 'why it is off'), but every clause carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return contents and does so field by field. The remaining gap, pagination behavior and what happens when limit truncates results, is minor for a two-parameter read-only list tool.

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% and both parameters, including the limit default of 20, are documented inline. The description adds only the workspace-versus-single-workflow scoping distinction, which the schema's own workflow_id description largely covers, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a concrete resource (the workspace's workflow schedules) and enumerates what each entry contains: run timing, enabled state, disabled reason, inputs, and last-run outcome. An agent knows exactly what comes back, though the listing verb itself is carried by the name rather than the text.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'or one workflow's' implies that supplying a workflow narrows the scope, which is usable guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of when the unfiltered workspace-wide listing is preferable, and no reference to complementary tools such as a run-detail listing.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources