Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
flowise-mcp

flowise-mcp

by JuliDir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

List Flowise Assistants

flowise_list_assistants
Read-onlyIdempotent

List all configured Flowise assistants to view available AI agents for specific tasks. Supports markdown or JSON output.

Instructions

List all assistants configured in Flowise.

Assistants are pre-configured AI agents that can be used for specific tasks.

Args: params: Input containing response_format.

Returns: List of configured assistants.

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": {
      "params": "<params>"
    },
    "name": "flowise_list_assistants"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds minimal behavioral info beyond 'list all assistants,' with no mention of pagination or filtering. Adequate but not enriching.

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?

The description is short and includes structured Args/Returns sections. It wastes no words, though the Args section is somewhat redundant.

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?

Given the output schema exists (assumed) and annotations provide safety, the description is fairly complete for a simple list tool. Could mention if there's any pagination or default ordering.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate but only restates 'params: Input containing response_format' without explaining the parameter's purpose or impact. Schema has enum but description adds no value.

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?

The description clearly states 'List all assistants configured in Flowise,' which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'flowise_get_assistant' by indicating it lists all, not just one.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., flowise_get_assistant for a single assistant). The description provides background on assistants but no usage context.

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