mcp-github-enterprise

List workflows

list_workflows

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists the GitHub Actions workflows in a repository with names, paths, and states, giving a starting point to inspect and optimize CI/CD pipelines.

Instructions

List the Actions workflows defined in a repository (name, path, state). Starting point for pipeline optimization.

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": {
      "org": "<org>",
      "repo": "<repo>"
    },
    "name": "list_workflows"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`org`	Yes	Organization login (must be within GHE_ORG_ALLOWLIST when that is set)
`repo`	Yes	Repository name (without the org/ prefix)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description usefully adds the returned fields, but says nothing about pagination, whether disabled workflows are included, or how many results come back for a large repository.

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 with the resource and returned fields front-loaded; nothing is buried. The trailing 'Starting point for pipeline optimization' is the weakest sentence and contributes atmosphere more than information.

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 two-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and rich annotations and no output schema, this is nearly complete. What an agent still lacks is result-set behavior (pagination, inclusion of disabled workflows), which is a modest gap for a list operation.

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 100% and both parameters document themselves, including the GHE_ORG_ALLOWLIST constraint on org and the no-prefix rule for repo. The description adds no additional meaning about these parameters, which is acceptable at full schema coverage but is a baseline-level contribution.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('List the Actions workflows defined in a repository') and even enumerates the returned fields (name, path, state), which clearly separates it from sibling list tools like list_self_hosted_runners or list_webhooks. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with any named alternative.

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?

The clause 'Starting point for pipeline optimization' hints at when an agent would reach for this tool, but it is framing rather than guidance. There is no statement of prerequisites, exclusions, or an alternative to prefer in any scenario, so the when-to-use signal is only implied.

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