Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

n8n: Source control pull

n8n_source_control_pull
Destructive

Pull n8n workflows from a connected Git repository to sync source-controlled changes into your instance, keeping automation definitions aligned with version control.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] [Enterprise] Pull workflows from source control (Git). Syncs workflows from connected repository. Requires n8n Enterprise/Pro license. All parameters are OPTIONAL.

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>"
    },
    "name": "n8n_source_control_pull"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
forceNo
variablesNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0
  2. Removedv3.13.1
  3. First observedv3.4.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-idempotent write. The description adds the license gate, which is genuine extra context. However, it never says what is actually destroyed or overwritten (local workflow versions?) or how the pull resolves conflicts, which is the key behavioral fact for a destructive sync.

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?

Short and front-loaded: purpose first, then sync behavior, then licensing. The bracketed tags "[UNIFIED]" and "[Enterprise]" are mild metadata noise, but nothing is padded or redundant.

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?

This is a destructive, non-idempotent mutation with three undocumented parameters and no output schema. The description omits overwrite semantics, conflict handling, and per-parameter meaning, and it misstates the required-parameter situation. For a tool that can clobber workflows, that leaves the agent under-informed.

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, and it does not. Worse, it asserts "All parameters are OPTIONAL" while the schema marks "site" as required — a directly misleading statement. Neither "force" nor "variables" is explained anywhere, leaving the two most consequential parameters opaque.

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: "Pull workflows from source control (Git)" and clarifies it "Syncs workflows from connected repository." An agent can distinguish this from the gitea pull-request tools and from n8n workflow CRUD siblings. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

Gives useful context for when the tool applies: pulling from a connected Git repository, and it adds a licensing prerequisite (Enterprise/Pro). It does not say when NOT to use it, what happens if no source control is connected, or how it relates to export/import workflow siblings.

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