Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Workato Dev MCP

Workato Dev MCP

by gmunro-lyft
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

list_jobs

Retrieve a recipe's recent job history, including status, start time, and title. Track executions and identify failures.

Instructions

List recent jobs for a recipe (id, status, started_at, title).

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": {
      "recipe_id": "<recipe_id>"
    },
    "name": "list_jobs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
recipe_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'List recent jobs' but fails to explain what 'recent' means, whether there is a default limit, pagination behavior, or any side effects. The return fields are listed but overall behavior is under-specified.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, scope, and expected output fields with no redundant words. It earns its place exceptionally well.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description gives a reasonable overview and lists return fields. However, it lacks parameter explanations, default behavior details, and any usage guidance, leaving gaps that matter for correct invocation.

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%. The description implicitly references recipe_id via 'for a recipe', but does not explain the limit parameter or elaborate on how recipe_id is used. It provides minimal added meaning beyond the schema, and fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('jobs') with a clear scoping phrase ('for a recipe'), and lists the returned fields (id, status, started_at, title). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_job or list_recipe_versions.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_job or list_recipe_versions. The description implies its use for listing recent jobs, but lacks explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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