mcp-server-sigma

Workbooks List Workbook Schedules

workbooks_list_workbook_schedules

Read-only

List every scheduled export for a workbook.

Instructions

List every scheduled export for a workbook.

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": {
      "workbook_id": "<workbook_id>"
    },
    "name": "workbooks_list_workbook_schedules"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`workbook_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

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/ non-destructive/ openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: the tool auto-paginates to the last page, so the agent need not paginate further, and it spells out the returned page keys (entries, total, nextPage null).

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 one sentence, followed by dense but relevant pagination details. No filler, though the second sentence packs multiple return-key clauses together and could be slightly clearer.

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?

For a simple one-parameter list tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers purpose and the non-obvious full-pagination behavior. It explains return keys a bit redundantly with the output schema, but nothing essential is missing.

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 description coverage is 0% for the single required workbook_id, so the description must carry the load. It only implies the parameter via 'for a workbook' and adds no format or sourcing detail, though workbook_id is largely self-evident.

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?

A specific verb ('List') plus resource ('every scheduled export for a workbook') that clearly distinguishes this from workbooks_list_report_schedules and from the add/update/delete schedule siblings without needing their schemas.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no naming of the report-schedule alternative, and no prerequisites (e.g. that workbook_id must exist). The reader infers usage only from the name and the phrasing 'for a workbook'.

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

Deploy Server