Volanea

volanea_get_workflow

Read-only

Read ONE workflow in full — the complete node/edge graph with every node's config and canvas position, plus per-node run counts. volanea_list_resources { workflows } returns summaries only. Read the stored graph with this before editing it via volanea_update_workflow, so you send back a modification of what is actually saved rather than a guess.

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": {
      "workflowId": "<workflowId>"
    },
    "name": "volanea_get_workflow"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workflowId`	Yes	The wf-… id.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`code`	No	Machine-readable failure code to branch on. Present only when success is false.
`data`	No	Present when success is true.
`error`	No	Human-readable failure reason. Present only when success is false.
`success`	Yes	False when the call failed; read `error` and `code` in that case.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is largely pre-supplied. The description adds useful context about what the read returns (full graph, configs, canvas positions, run counts) and the freshness guarantee implied by reading stored state. It doesn't cover failure modes such as an unknown workflowId, which keeps it at a solid but not exceptional 3-4.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns, how it differs from the list sibling, and the workflow it belongs to. The return-shape detail is front-loaded and every clause carries information an agent would otherwise have to infer.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-parameter read with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything else needed — output richness, sibling differentiation, and the sequencing role relative to volanea_update_workflow. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single workflowId parameter is documented as 'The wf-… id.' The description reinforces the singular-cardinality constraint with the capitalized 'ONE workflow', but adds no format or sourcing detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read ONE workflow in full') and immediately enumerates scope — complete node/edge graph, per-node config, canvas position, per-node run counts. It explicitly contrasts with volanea_list_resources { workflows } which 'returns summaries only', so an agent can separate the two without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit when-to-use rule ('Read the stored graph with this before editing it via volanea_update_workflow') plus the reason (send back a modification of what is actually saved rather than a guess). It also names the alternative for the summary case, so both branches are covered.

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

All Volanea tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?