Skip to main content
Glama

Cloudflare: Get workers script

cloudflare_get_workers_script
Read-only

Fetch Cloudflare Workers script metadata such as ID, name, modification date, and usage model without pulling the script body. Specify site and script name to inspect details.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] Fetch Workers script metadata (id, name, modified_on, usage model). Does not return the script body.

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": {
      "site": "<site>",
      "script_name": "<script_name>"
    },
    "name": "cloudflare_get_workers_script"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
account_idNo
script_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the body is excluded, which is genuine behavioral context not in the annotations, but it says nothing about auth requirements, error behavior for missing scripts, or pagination (none expected). With annotations carrying safety, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by the key exclusion. No waste, though the space could have been used for parameter meaning.

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?

A read tool with no output schema and 0% param coverage leaves the agent guessing about site/account_id semantics and the shape of the returned metadata. The single exclusion note is helpful but insufficient for a 3-parameter tool with an opaque 'site' field.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, yet it mentions none of the three parameters. It never explains what 'site' means versus 'account_id' (and why account_id defaults to null) or whether script_name is the id or the script title.

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 ('Fetch Workers script metadata') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, modified_on, usage model). It is distinguishable from siblings like delete/list, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

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 on when to use this versus cloudflare_list_workers_scripts or cloudflare_get_zone, and no prerequisites such as required token permissions or whether site/account_id must be pre-resolved. The negative statement 'Does not return the script body' implies usage only indirectly.

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