Skip to main content
Glama

get_workflow

Retrieve detailed information about a specific workflow in the Automatisch automation platform by providing its workflow ID.

Instructions

Get detailed information about a specific workflow

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workflowIdYesWorkflow ID to retrieve

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the 'get_workflow' tool. It calls main.api.getWorkflow with the provided workflowId argument and returns the JSON-stringified result as text content.
    case "get_workflow":
      return {
        content: [
          {
            type: "text",
            text: JSON.stringify(await main.api.getWorkflow(args?.workflowId), null, 2)
          }
        ]
      };
  • Schema definition for the 'get_workflow' tool, including name, description, and input schema requiring a workflowId string.
    {
      name: "get_workflow",
      description: "Get detailed information about a specific workflow",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object",
        properties: {
          workflowId: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Workflow ID to retrieve"
          }
        },
        required: ["workflowId"]
      }
    },
  • API helper function getWorkflow that is called by the tool handler. Currently a stub referencing logic from index.ts.
    getWorkflow: async function(workflowId: any) {
      // ... copy getWorkflow logic from index.ts ...
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get detailed information' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what the response format includes. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, though it could be slightly more structured by including usage hints without losing conciseness.

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 complexity (retrieving detailed info), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' includes, potential errors, or behavioral aspects, making it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's context and usage.

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 100%, with the parameter 'workflowId' documented as 'Workflow ID to retrieve'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline is 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting, but no extra value is provided.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific workflow'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_workflows' or 'test_workflow', which would require specifying what 'detailed information' entails compared to those alternatives.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a workflow ID), exclusions, or comparisons to siblings like 'list_workflows' for overviews or 'test_workflow' for validation, leaving usage context unclear.

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/milisp/automatisch-mcp-server'

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