Skip to main content
Glama
GethosTheWalrus

Temporal MCP Server

by GethosTheWalrus
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

list_schedules

Retrieve all Temporal schedules with pagination controls for limit and skip, so you can view and manage scheduled workflows across a namespace.

Instructions

List all schedules. Specify 'limit' to control the number of results (default: 100). Use 'skip' to paginate through results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skipNoNumber of results to skip for pagination (default: 0)
limitNoMaximum number of schedules to return (default: 100)
namespaceNoTemporal namespace for this operation; omit to use the server default

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.10.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / namespace
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Temporal namespace for this operation; omit to use the server default",
+  "enum": [
+    "default"
+  ],
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv1.9.0
  3. Removedv1.5.0
  4. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior and default page size (100), but does not state that this is a read-only, non-mutating operation, nor does it describe ordering or what happens if limit exceeds available schedules.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action followed by pagination controls. Every sentence carries information and nothing is wasted.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a parameterless list tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the essentials, but with no output schema and no annotations it omits return shape and ordering. It is adequate but leaves modest gaps for an agent deciding how to page through results.

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%, so the schema already documents skip, limit, and namespace fully. The description only restates limit and skip defaults, adding no meaning beyond the schema; this is the baseline 3 case.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all schedules'), which is distinguishable from siblings like list_workflows, list_activities, and describe_schedule. It does not, however, explicitly contrast itself with describe_schedule, which is the closest alternative.

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?

Pagination guidance is given (limit, skip), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance relative to alternatives such as describe_schedule for single-schedule details or list_workflows. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools