n8n-workflow-builder-mcp
n8n Workflow Builder MCP
Сервер протокола контекста модели (MCP) для создания и изменения рабочих процессов n8n. Создавайте рабочие процессы n8n с помощью ИИ — работает с Claude Code, VS Code, Cursor и любым клиентом, поддерживающим MCP.
ДЕМОНСТРАЦИОННОЕ ВИДЕО:
Правила Cursor
Файл с правилами находится в
rules/n8n-mcp-server-rules.mdc
Related MCP server: mcp-n8n-builder
Основные возможности
Управление рабочими процессами: Программное создание, обновление и выполнение рабочих процессов n8n (выполнение пока не реализовано)
Обнаружение узлов: Изучение доступных узлов n8n и их возможностей
Управление соединениями: Создание связей между узлами рабочего процесса
Интеграция с ИИ: Специальные инструменты для подключения компонентов ИИ в рабочих процессах
Интерфейс, удобный для ИИ: Разработан специально для взаимодействия с ИИ-агентами
Управление версиями N8N: Автоматическое определение версии и обработка совместимости — поддерживает 184+ версии n8n (1.86.0 – 2.6.2) с динамической фильтрацией узлов и сопоставлением с «ближайшей младшей версией» для обеспечения обратной совместимости
Предварительные требования
Node.js (v18 или выше)
npm (для команды npx)
Клиент, поддерживающий MCP (Claude Code, VS Code, Cursor и т.д.)
Установка и настройка
Получение API-ключа n8n
Откройте ваш экземпляр n8n в браузере
Перейдите в Settings > API Keys
Нажмите Create API Key
Скопируйте созданный ключ и используйте его в своей конфигурации
Claude Code (рекомендуется)
Добавьте MCP-сервер с помощью CLI Claude Code:
claude mcp add n8n-workflow-builder -- npx -y n8n-workflow-builder-mcpЗатем установите переменные окружения:
claude mcp add n8n-workflow-builder \
-e N8N_API_URL=http://localhost:5678 \
-e N8N_API_KEY=your-n8n-api-key-here \
-- npx -y n8n-workflow-builder-mcp
N8N_VERSIONявляется необязательным — сервер автоматически определяет его через API.
VS Code / Cursor
Добавьте в ваш файл конфигурации MCP (.vscode/mcp.json для VS Code, .cursor/mcp.json для Cursor):
{
"mcpServers": {
"n8n-workflow-builder": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "n8n-workflow-builder-mcp"],
"env": {
"N8N_API_URL": "http://localhost:5678",
"N8N_API_KEY": "your-n8n-api-key-here"
}
}
}
}Перезапустите IDE, чтобы изменения вступили в силу.
Установка для разработки
Для разработки или локального тестирования клонируйте и соберите проект из исходного кода:
git clone https://github.com/ifmelate/n8n-workflow-builder-mcp.git
cd n8n-workflow-builder-mcp
npm install
npm run buildЗатем укажите вашему MCP-клиенту путь к собранной точке входа:
# Claude Code
claude mcp add n8n-workflow-builder -- node /absolute/path/to/n8n-workflow-builder-mcp/dist/index.js
# VS Code / Cursor — use the same JSON config above with "command": "node" and "args": ["/absolute/path/to/dist/index.js"]Для разработки с автоматической пересборкой:
npm run devДоступные инструменты MCP
Сервер предоставляет следующие инструменты для работы с рабочими процессами n8n:
Основное управление рабочими процессами
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
create_workflow | Создать новый рабочий процесс n8n |
|
list_workflows | Список рабочих процессов в рабочей директории |
|
get_workflow_details | Получить подробную информацию о конкретном рабочем процессе |
|
validate_workflow | Проверить файл рабочего процесса на соответствие схемам узлов и связность |
|
Управление узлами
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
add_node | Добавить новый узел в рабочий процесс |
|
edit_node | Редактировать существующий узел в рабочем процессе |
|
delete_node | Удалить узел из рабочего процесса |
|
list_available_nodes | Список доступных типов узлов с опциональной фильтрацией. Поддерживает синонимы в стиле тегов и логику OR/AND для нескольких токенов |
|
Управление соединениями
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
add_connection | Создать соединение между двумя узлами |
|
add_ai_connections | Подключить ИИ-модель, инструменты и память к агенту |
|
connect_main_chain | Построить минимальный основной путь через узлы ИИ-рабочего процесса (Триггер → Модель → Память → Эмбеддинги → Загрузчик документов → Векторное хранилище → Векторный инструмент → Агент) |
|
Планирование и создание рабочих процессов
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
plan_workflow | Создать неразрушающий план (узлы и соединения) для обновления рабочего процесса. Не записывает файлы |
|
review_workflow_plan | Применить план в памяти и вернуть ошибки валидации, предупреждения и предложенные исправления. Не записывает файлы |
|
apply_workflow_plan | Применить ранее проверенный план к рабочему процессу на диске (атомарная запись) |
|
compose_ai_workflow | Создать сложный ИИ-рабочий процесс (агент + модель + память + эмбеддинги + вектор + инструменты + триггер) за один вызов, включая связывание и базовую валидацию |
|
Управление параметрами
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
suggest_node_params | Предложить минимальные допустимые параметры для типа узла, используя значения по умолчанию и обязательные поля |
|
list_missing_parameters | Список обязательных параметров, отсутствующих для узла, с учетом правил видимости |
|
fix_node_params | Вернуть параметры с примененными значениями по умолчанию для отсутствующих обязательных полей |
|
Шаблоны и обнаружение
Название инструмента | Описание | Ключевые параметры |
list_template_examples | Список примеров использования узлов, извлеченных из бесплатных шаблонов. Фильтрация по node_type или template_name |
|
get_n8n_version_info | Получить текущую версию N8N и возможности |
|
Поведение валидации
validate_workflow повышает уровень предупреждений до ошибок и дополнительно выдает ошибку, если какой-либо активный узел не подключен (напрямую или через порты ИИ) к основной цепочке, начинающейся с предполагаемого startNode. Используйте connect_from/connect_to или add_ai_connections для исправления связности.
Устранение неполадок
Общие
Проверьте вашу конфигурацию MCP — убедитесь, что JSON валиден и имя сервера совпадает.
Обновите Node.js до последней версии LTS.
Очистите кэш npm, если npx выдает ошибку:
npm cache clean --forceПопробуйте глобальную установку в качестве запасного варианта:
npm install -g n8n-workflow-builder-mcp
Claude Code
Выполните
claude mcp list, чтобы убедиться, что сервер зарегистрирован.Проверьте логи с помощью
claude mcp logs n8n-workflow-builder.
VS Code / Cursor
Проверьте панель вывода (Output) — выберите "MCP" в выпадающем списке, чтобы увидеть логи сервера.
Убедитесь, что сервер включен в Settings > Features > MCP Servers.
Перезапустите IDE после внесения изменений в конфигурацию.
Структура проекта
/src: Основной исходный код/src/tools: Реализация инструментов MCP/src/models: Модели данных/src/utils: Вспомогательные функции/src/middleware: Аутентификация и промежуточное ПО/config: Файлы конфигурации/tests: Файлы тестов/workflow_nodes: Определения узлов n8n/docs: Дополнительная документация
Вклад в проект
Вклад приветствуется! Пожалуйста, не стесняйтесь отправлять Pull Request.
Сделайте форк репозитория
Создайте ветку для вашей функции (
git checkout -b feature/amazing-feature)Зафиксируйте изменения (
git commit -m 'Add some amazing feature')Отправьте изменения в ветку (
git push origin feature/amazing-feature)Откройте Pull Request
Лицензия
MIT License
Available Tools
10 toolsadd_ai_connectionsD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agent_node_id | Yes | The ID of the agent node that will use the model and tools | |
| memory_node_id | No | The ID of the memory node (optional) | |
| model_node_id | No | The ID of the language model node (optional) | |
| tool_node_ids | No | Array of tool node IDs to connect to the agent (optional) | |
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow to add the AI connections to |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
add_connectionD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source_node_id | Yes | The ID of the source node for the connection | |
| source_node_output_name | Yes | The name of the output handle on the source node (e.g., 'main') | |
| target_node_id | Yes | The ID of the target node for the connection | |
| target_node_input_index | No | The index for the target node's input handle (default: 0) | |
| target_node_input_name | Yes | The name of the input handle on the target node (e.g., 'main') | |
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow to add the connection to |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
add_nodeD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| node_name | No | The name for the new node (e.g., 'My Gmail Node') | |
| node_type | Yes | The type of node to add (e.g., 'gmail', 'slack', 'openAi'). You can specify with or without the 'n8n-nodes-base.' prefix. The system will handle proper casing (e.g., 'openai' will be converted to 'openAi' if that's the correct casing). | |
| parameters | No | The parameters for the node | |
| position | No | The position of the node {x,y} - will be converted to [x,y] for N8nWorkflowNode | |
| typeVersion | No | The type version for the node (e.g., 1, 1.1). Defaults to 1 if not specified. | |
| webhookId | No | Optional webhook ID for certain node types like triggers. | |
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow to add the node to | |
| workflow_path | No | Optional direct path to the workflow file (absolute or relative to current working directory). If not provided, uses standard workflow_data directory approach. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
create_workflowD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflow_name | Yes | The name for the new workflow | |
| workspace_dir | Yes | Absolute path to the project root directory where workflow_data will be stored |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
delete_nodeD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| node_id | Yes | The ID of the node to delete | |
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow containing the node | |
| workflow_path | No | Optional direct path to the workflow file (absolute or relative to current working directory). If not provided, uses standard workflow_data directory approach. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
edit_nodeD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| node_id | Yes | The ID of the node to edit | |
| node_name | No | The new name for the node | |
| node_type | No | The new type for the node (e.g., 'gmail', 'slack', 'openAi'). You can specify with or without the 'n8n-nodes-base.' prefix. The system will handle proper casing (e.g., 'openai' will be converted to 'openAi' if that's the correct casing). | |
| parameters | No | The new parameters | |
| position | No | The new position {x,y} - will be converted to [x,y] | |
| typeVersion | No | The new type version for the node | |
| webhookId | No | Optional new webhook ID for the node. | |
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow containing the node | |
| workflow_path | No | Optional workflow path to the workflow file |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_n8n_version_infoD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_workflow_detailsD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflow_name | Yes | The Name of the workflow to get details for | |
| workflow_path | No | Optional direct path to the workflow file (absolute or relative to current working directory). If not provided, uses standard workflow_data directory approach. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_available_nodesD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| n8n_version | No | Filter nodes by N8N version compatibility. If not provided, uses current configured N8N version. | |
| search_term | No | An optional search term to filter nodes by their name, type, or description. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_workflowsD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
10 tool updates
v1.0.0- First observed
add_ai_connections - First observed
add_connection - First observed
add_node - First observed
create_workflow - First observed
delete_node - First observed
edit_node - First observed
get_n8n_version_info - First observed
get_workflow_details - First observed
list_available_nodes - First observed
list_workflows
TDQS
Scored across 10 tools
Most tools have distinct purposes targeting different aspects of n8n workflow management (e.g., create_workflow vs. list_workflows, add_node vs. edit_node vs. delete_node). However, add_ai_connections and add_connection could potentially be confused without descriptions, as their relationship is unclear—they might overlap in handling connections.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case throughout (e.g., add_connection, create_workflow, get_workflow_details). There are no deviations in naming conventions, making the set predictable and readable.
With 10 tools, the count is well-scoped for a workflow builder server, covering core operations like creating, listing, and managing workflows and nodes. Each tool appears to earn its place without being excessive or insufficient for the domain.
The tools cover basic CRUD operations for workflows and nodes (create, list, get, edit, delete), but there are notable gaps. For example, there's no update_workflow or delete_workflow tool, and the absence of descriptions makes it hard to assess if AI connections and general connections are fully covered, potentially leaving dead ends in workflow management.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
Open-source Zapier/n8n alternative as an MCP server: agents build, run and debug your workflows.
MCP server for AI agents to plan, verify, and deploy Cloudflare-native apps.
LLM Orchestration Agent (Mcp)
MCP server for secureFlows: token-free URL builders and integration-linting tools for AI agents.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server enabling secure interaction with n8n workflows, executions, and settings via the Model Context Protocol, designed for integration with Large Language Models (LLMs).3358 npm119MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenance🪄 MCP server for programmatic creation and management of n8n workflows. Enables AI assistants to build, modify, and manage workflows without direct user intervention through a comprehensive set of tools and resources for interacting with n8n's REST API.1050 npm86MIT
- AlicenseBqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for managing n8n workflows through AI assistants. Supports workflow CRUD operations, synchronization, inspection, and execution support for automation-focused workflows.19133 npm2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for integrating with n8n, enabling workflow automation and management through natural language.318 npm1MIT