Skip to main content
Glama

template_get_workflow_status

Retrieve the status of a specific workflow on the Railway MCP server using the workflow ID. Ideal for monitoring and verifying the progress of active workflows within the infrastructure.

Instructions

[API] Get the status of a workflow

⚡️ Best for: ✓ Checking workflow status

⚠️ Not for: × Creating new services

→ Next steps: service_info

→ Related: template_list, template_deploy

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workflowIdYesID of the workflow to get the status of

Implementation Reference

  • Registration and handler for the 'template_get_workflow_status' tool. The handler function fetches the workflow status by calling templatesService.getWorkflowStatus.
    createTool(
      "template_get_workflow_status",
      formatToolDescription({
        type: 'API',
        description: "Get the status of a workflow",
        bestFor: ["Checking workflow status"],
        notFor: ["Creating new services"],
        relations: {
          nextSteps: ["service_info"],
          related: ["template_list, template_deploy"]
        }
      }),
      {
        workflowId: z.string().describe("ID of the workflow to get the status of")
      },
      async ({ workflowId }) => {
        return templatesService.getWorkflowStatus(workflowId);
      }
    ),
  • Input schema definition using Zod for the workflowId parameter.
    {
      workflowId: z.string().describe("ID of the workflow to get the status of")
    },
  • Helper method in TemplatesService that retrieves workflow status from the API client and formats success/error responses.
    async getWorkflowStatus(workflowId: string) {
      const response = await this.client.templates.getWorkflowStatus(workflowId);
    
      if (response.error) {
        return createErrorResponse(`Error with workflow ${workflowId}: ${response.error}`);
      }
    
      if (response.status.toLowerCase() === 'complete') {
        return createSuccessResponse({
          text: `Workflow ${workflowId} completed successfully`,
          data: response
        });
      }
    
      return createSuccessResponse({
        text: `Workflow ${workflowId} is still running. Status: ${response.status}`,
        data: response
      });
    }
  • Global registration of all tools, including templateTools which contains template_get_workflow_status, via MCP server.tool calls.
    export function registerAllTools(server: McpServer) {
      // Collect all tools
      const allTools = [
        ...databaseTools,
        ...deploymentTools,
        ...domainTools,
        ...projectTools,
        ...serviceTools,
        ...tcpProxyTools,
        ...variableTools,
        ...configTools,
        ...volumeTools,
        ...templateTools,
      ] as Tool[];
    
      // Register each tool with the server
      allTools.forEach((tool) => {
        server.tool(
          ...tool
        );
      });
    } 
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action ('Get the status') without detailing behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, error handling, rate limits, or what the status response includes. For a tool with no annotations, this lacks essential context about how it behaves.

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 well-structured and concise, using bullet points and symbols (⚡️, ✓, ⚠️, ×, →) to organize information efficiently. Every sentence earns its place by providing purpose, guidelines, and related tools without unnecessary details. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (simple read operation with 1 parameter), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and usage well but lacks details on behavioral aspects and output. For a tool without annotations or output schema, it should provide more context on what the status response includes, but it's adequate for basic use.

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% description coverage, with the parameter 'workflowId' clearly documented. The description does not add any additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose as 'Get the status of a workflow' with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('workflow status'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'deployment_status' by specifying 'workflow' rather than 'deployment', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools. The purpose is clear but could be more specific about what 'status' entails.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit usage guidelines with 'Best for: Checking workflow status' and 'Not for: Creating new services'. It also includes 'Next steps: service_info' and 'Related: template_list, template_deploy', offering clear alternatives and context. This is comprehensive guidance on when to use this tool versus others.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/jason-tan-swe/railway-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server