P6 MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

p6_list_wbs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists a Primavera P6 project's WBS tree in P6 order with paging, optional subtree rollups, parent/depth filters, and baseline progress metrics for schedule analysis.

Instructions

WBS tree in P6 order (each node before its children), one page: {total, offset, returned, next_offset, rows, root}. Row: wbs_id, parent_wbs_id, depth (project node 0), wbs_code (as P6 shows it, e.g. 'PRJ.5.1'), wbs_short_name, wbs_name, children (direct), and with rollups=True the rollup of its whole subtree: activities, open (not completed, LOE and WBS summary left out), not_started, in_progress, completed, min_tf_d and negative_float (open activities, days of each calendar), start, finish (actual, else early), budget_units, actual_units (labor plus nonlabor), units_pct (actual / at completion, as P6 Units % Complete) and bl_planned_pct: baseline planned units at the data date / baseline budget units of the subtree, x 100 (the baseline's labor and nonlabor assignments placed by the Activity ID of the current activities, linear between their planned dates as p6_progress_curve and the dashboard; None without a baseline, a data date or baseline units). baseline= a Project ID (default: the project baseline); the result says which one (baseline). parent= starts at that WBS code, full or relative to the project node ('5.1'); max_depth counts levels below the start node. root repeats the start node (unplaced = activities outside the tree, when it is the project node).

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": {
      "project": "<project>"
    },
    "name": "p6_list_wbs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Rows per page (max 200).
`offset`	No	Rows to skip: pass next_offset from the previous page.
`parent`	No
`project`	Yes	Project ID as shown in P6 (p6_list_projects).
`rollups`	No
`baseline`	No
`max_depth`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0Oct 29, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / baseline

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "description": "Project ID as shown in P6 (p6_list_projects).",
+      "minLength": 1,
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Baseline"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context on top: pagination via next_offset, rollups=True expands each row to subtree totals, and explicit null conditions ('None without a baseline, a data date or baseline units') plus fallbacks ('actual, else early', 'open = not completed, LOE and WBS summary left out'). This is above what the annotations convey.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The summary sentence is correctly front-loaded, but the rest collapses row-field definitions, parameter semantics and edge cases into one dense run-on block with inconsistent labeling. Nearly all the content is relevant, yet the wall-of-text form makes it hard to scan for the one detail an agent needs.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description carries the full return contract (envelope keys total/offset/returned/next_offset/rows/root, per-row fields, rollup fields) and covers the tricky cases such as unplaced activities and bl_planned_pct nullability. It is thorough for a 7-parameter tool, though a short note on which sibling to prefer for flat activity queries would close the remaining gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 43%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: baseline is described as a Project ID defaulting to the project baseline with the chosen one echoed in the result, parent accepts a full or relative WBS code like '5.1', max_depth counts levels below the start node, and rollups is defined by its effect. limit/offset are left to the schema, which documents them adequately.

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 first clause states a specific verb and resource: 'WBS tree in P6 order (each node before its children), one page'. That is unmistakably a WBS-hierarchy listing rather than an activity/project tool. It never explicitly contrasts itself with siblings like p6_project_summary or p6_query_activities, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied. The description explains what parent and max_depth do ('starts at that WBS code', 'counts levels below the start node'), which hints at when to narrow the walk, but there is no explicit 'use this when you need X, use Y for Z' guidance and no mention of any sibling tool.

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

Deploy Server