Skip to main content
Glama

n8n_transfer_workflow

Transfer a workflow from one n8n project to another using workflow ID and target project ID.

Instructions

Transfer a workflow to another project

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesWorkflow ID
destinationProjectIdYesTarget project ID

Implementation Reference

  • The API client method that performs the transfer workflow operation.
    async transferWorkflow(id: string, destinationProjectId: string): Promise<any> {
      const response = await this.client.put(`/workflows/${id}/transfer`, {
        destinationProjectId
      });
      return response.data;
    }
  • The tool handler in index.ts that calls the client method for 'n8n_transfer_workflow'.
    case 'n8n_transfer_workflow': {
      if (!args?.id || !args?.destinationProjectId) {
        throw new Error('id and destinationProjectId are required');
      }
      const result = await n8nClient.transferWorkflow(args.id as string, args.destinationProjectId as string);
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: formatResponse(result) }],
      };
    }
  • The tool schema definition for 'n8n_transfer_workflow'.
    {
      name: 'n8n_transfer_workflow',
      description: 'Transfer a workflow to another project',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: { type: 'string', description: 'Workflow ID' },
          destinationProjectId: { type: 'string', description: 'Target project ID' },
        },
        required: ['id', 'destinationProjectId'],
      },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. It fails to clarify whether the source workflow is deleted (move) or duplicated (copy), whether execution history and tags transfer, or required permissions. 'Transfer' implies mutation but lacks critical safety context.

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?

Single sentence with zero waste and front-loaded information. However, extreme brevity leaves dangerous ambiguity for a cross-project data migration operation; appropriately concise but underspecified for the tool's risk level.

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?

Insufficient for a destructive/mutating operation. Missing: side effects on source project, credential reference handling, idempotency behavior, and error conditions. No output schema requires description to explain return values or success confirmation, which is absent.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions ('Workflow ID', 'Target project ID'). Since the schema fully documents parameters, baseline is 3. Description adds no additional semantics (e.g., ID format, validation rules) but does not need to compensate for coverage gaps.

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 ('Transfer') and resource ('workflow') with clear scope ('to another project'). Distinguishes from sibling 'n8n_transfer_credential' by specifying the workflow resource, though 'transfer' remains ambiguous regarding whether this is a move (destructive to source) or copy operation.

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 guidance provided on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., 'update_workflow' to change projects), prerequisites (ownership requirements), or when the operation might fail (e.g., destination project constraints).

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Shravan1610/n8n-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server