Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Workflowy MCP Server

Workflowy MCP Server

by dp-pcs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

workflowy_uncomplete_node

Revert a node to incomplete status, marking it as pending in Workflowy outlines.

Instructions

Mark a node as incomplete (for todo-style nodes).

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": {
      "nodeId": "<nodeId>"
    },
    "name": "workflowy_uncomplete_node"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nodeIdYesThe unique ID of the node to mark incomplete

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the node must already be completed, what happens if it is already incomplete, any side effects, or required permissions. The description carries the full burden but fails to provide essential behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no unnecessary words, but it is overly concise and lacks critical details. Conciseness is good, but it sacrifices completeness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is still incomplete. It does not explain what happens upon success, error conditions, or how to obtain the nodeId. The absence of any behavioral or usage context makes it insufficient for an agent to use confidently.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'nodeId' described as 'The unique ID of the node to mark incomplete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Mark a node as incomplete') and specifies the resource ('node') with context ('for todo-style nodes'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'workflowy_complete_node' by implying the opposite action, though it could be more explicit about the exact meaning of 'incomplete'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'workflowy_complete_node' or other node operations. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions (e.g., node must be a todo), or situations where this tool is inappropriate.

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