Onplana

list_workflows

Read-onlyIdempotent

List workflows in the org. Returns each workflow's name, description, isActive, projectId (null = org-wide), runCount, maxRuns, triggerEvent, lastRunAt. Pass projectId to scope to one project (or omit for org-wide + every project). Pass entity and entityId to list the workflows set up on one project, task, document, library or list. PREFER get_workflow for the full graph + steps definition. Plan gate: automations (PRO+).

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_workflows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Default 50, max 100.
`cursor`	No
`entity`	No	The kind of thing entityId names. Use with entityId.
`entityId`	No	The id of the project, task, document, library or list. Use with entity.
`isActive`	No
`projectId`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 19, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / entity

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The kind of thing entityId names. Use with entityId.",
+  "enum": [
+    "project",
+    "task",
+    "document",
+    "library",
+    "list"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / entityId

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The id of the project, task, document, library or list. Use with entity.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedJun 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine value beyond that: the returned field set, the plan gate ('automations (PRO+)'), and the null-vs-org-wide semantics of projectId. No return-format or pagination detail, but coverage is solid.

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?

Dense but well front-loaded: purpose, then return fields, then parameter guidance, then the sibling alternative last. Every clause earns its place; the return-field list is slightly long but informative rather than padding.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned fields, scoping behavior, the alternative tool, and the plan gate. For a zero-required-param list tool this is complete enough to call correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

At 50% schema coverage the description carries weight and does: it explains projectId scoping (null = org-wide, omit = org-wide + every project) and the entity/entityId pairing, which the schema only partially documents. limit, cursor, and isActive remain unexplained, so it stops short of full coverage.

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+resource ('List workflows in the org') and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what it gets back. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_workflow, which lacks the ambiguity typical in a 100+ tool inventory.

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 concrete routing rules: pass projectId to scope to one project, omit for org-wide, pass entity+entityId for entity-scoped workflows, and 'PREFER get_workflow for the full graph + steps definition.' Both when-to-use and the named alternative are present.

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

All Onplana 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.