Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
Jimmy974

n8n Workflow Builder MCP Server

by Jimmy974
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Remote

n8n 工作流生成器 MCP 服务器

铁匠徽章

用于以编程方式创建和管理 n8n 工作流的模型上下文协议 (MCP) 服务器。

特征

  • 使用节点和连接创建工作流

  • 验证工作流程规范

  • 导出完整的工作流配置

  • 通过 MCP 的 REST API 接口

Related MCP server: MCP Server for n8n Integration

安装

通过 Smithery 安装

要通过Smithery自动为 Claude Desktop 安装 n8n Workflow Builder：

npx -y @smithery/cli install n8n-workflow-builder --client claude

手动安装

  1. 克隆存储库：

git clone https://github.com/[your-username]/n8n-workflow-builder.git
cd n8n-workflow-builder

  1. 安装依赖项：

npm install

  1. 编译 TypeScript：

npx tsc

  1. 启动服务器：

npm start

用法

服务器提供了一个create_workflow工具来接受工作流规范：

{
  "nodes": [
    {
      "type": "n8n-nodes-base.httpRequest",
      "name": "HTTP Request",
      "parameters": {
        "url": "https://example.com",
        "method": "GET"
      }
    }
  ],
  "connections": []
}

配置

将服务器添加到您的 MCP 配置：

{
  "n8n-workflow-builder": {
    "command": "node",
    "args": ["/path/to/n8n-workflow-builder/dist/index.js"]
  }
}

执照

麻省理工学院

Available Tools

1 tool
create_workflowC

Create and configure n8n workflows programmatically

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodesYes
connectionsNo

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'create and configure' which implies a write operation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as permissions required, whether workflows are active upon creation, error handling, or rate limits.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with every word earning its place.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the complexity of creating workflows (a mutation operation), no annotations, no output schema, and low parameter semantics, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, output, error cases, or integration context, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage for the 2 parameters, the description does not compensate by explaining what 'nodes' and 'connections' represent in the context of n8n workflows. It adds no meaning beyond the bare schema, leaving parameters semantically unclear.

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 clearly states the verb ('Create and configure') and resource ('n8n workflows'), specifying that this is for programmatic creation. However, without sibling tools, there's no explicit differentiation from alternatives, preventing a perfect score.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other methods (e.g., UI-based creation) or any prerequisites. It implies usage for programmatic workflow creation but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool update
    • First observedcreate_workflow
Deploy Server
Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'create_workflow' has a clear, distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.

Naming Consistency5/5

The naming pattern is perfectly consistent as there is only one tool. It follows a clear verb_noun convention ('create_workflow'), which would be easy to maintain if more tools were added.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is insufficient for a 'Workflow Builder' server, which implies capabilities like listing, updating, executing, or deleting workflows. This feels thin and under-scoped for the apparent domain of workflow management.

Completeness1/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for workflow building. It only offers creation, with no ability to read, update, delete, execute, or manage existing workflows. This creates significant dead ends for agents trying to perform basic lifecycle operations.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Appeared in Searches