Skip to main content
Glama
jupiterbak

AYX-MCP-Wrapper

by jupiterbak

remove_workflow_from_collection

Remove a workflow from an Alteryx collection using workflow and collection IDs to manage workflow organization.

Instructions

Remove a workflow from a collection by its ID

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
collection_idYes
workflow_idYes

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of the remove_workflow_from_collection tool. Validates existence of collection and workflow, then calls the Alteryx collections API to remove the workflow from the collection.
    def remove_workflow_from_collection(self, collection_id: str, workflow_id: str):
        """Remove a workflow from a collection by its ID"""
        try:
            collection = self.collections_api.collections_get_collection(collection_id)
            if not collection:
                return "Error: Collection not found"
            workflow = self.workflows_api.workflows_get_workflow(workflow_id)
            if not workflow:
                return "Error: Workflow not found"
            api_response = self.collections_api.collections_remove_workflow_from_collection(collection_id, workflow_id)
            return pprint.pformat(api_response)
        except ApiException as e:
            return f"Error: {e}"
  • MCP server tool registration. Decorated with @self.app.tool() and delegates execution to the AYXMCPTools instance.
    @self.app.tool()
    def remove_workflow_from_collection(collection_id: str, workflow_id: str):
        """Remove a workflow from a collection by its ID"""
        return self.tools.remove_workflow_from_collection(collection_id, workflow_id)
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits like whether removal is permanent or reversible, permission requirements, or effects on related entities (e.g., schedules). It lacks details on error conditions or response format, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words, front-loading the core action. It meets the ideal of conciseness without under-specification for this simple tool.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, error handling, and return values, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively beyond its basic purpose.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but only vaguely references parameters ('by its ID'). It doesn't explain what 'collection_id' and 'workflow_id' represent, their formats, or sourcing. This adds minimal value beyond the schema's property names, resulting in a baseline score due to inadequate compensation.

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 ('Remove') and target ('a workflow from a collection'), with the specific identifier 'by its ID' providing additional precision. It distinguishes from sibling 'add_workflow_to_collection' by being the inverse operation, though it doesn't explicitly name that sibling.

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 versus alternatives like 'delete_collection' or 'update_collection_name_or_owner', nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing existing workflow and collection IDs. The description implies usage only through its action but offers no contextual boundaries.

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

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/jupiterbak/AYX-MCP-Wrapper'

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