mcp-server-sigma

Workbooks List Report Schedules

workbooks_list_report_schedules

Read-only

List scheduled exports for a report.

Instructions

List scheduled exports for a report.

Follows Sigma's pagination to the last page and returns the keys of Sigma's page: entries from every page, total when Sigma sends it (Sigma's value), and nextPage null (hasMore false where Sigma sends it) since every page is read.

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": {
      "report_id": "<report_id>"
    },
    "name": "workbooks_list_report_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`report_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.0.4Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the read-only annotations, the description discloses important behavior: it follows pagination to the last page and returns aggregated entries from every page, with total and nextPage/hasMore semantics explained. This is meaningful operational context for a paginated read tool.

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 purpose is front-loaded in a short first sentence, and the pagination details are useful rather than filler. The second sentence is dense and repeats “Sigma’s,” but it earns its place by explaining output behavior.

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?

With read-only annotations and an output schema already present, the description supplies the key missing behavioral context around full pagination. The main remaining gap is report_id semantics, which is left undocumented in both schema and description.

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%, and the only parameter is report_id with no format or source guidance in the schema. The description implies it identifies a report but adds no detail about expected ID format or how to obtain it.

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 states a specific verb and resource: list scheduled exports for a report. That scope distinguishes it from sibling schedule tools tied to workbooks, data models, or members, and an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 explains what the tool does but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparison to alternatives such as workbooks_list_workbook_schedules or workbooks_create_report_schedule. Usage is only implied by the purpose sentence.

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

Deploy Server