local-comfyui-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

diagnose_workspace

Diagnose an open ComfyUI workflow against schemas and report issues worst first: missing node types, unconnected inputs, mismatched links, out-of-range values, and muted/bypassed nodes, with fixes.

Instructions

Report what is wrong with the workflow open in the browser, worst first.

Reads the live graph and checks it against ComfyUI's own node schemas: node types that are not installed, required inputs with nothing plugged in, links whose types do not match, widget values outside the declared range, and inputs a node no longer has. Muted and bypassed nodes are reported too - they are the commonest reason a workflow "does nothing" while looking fine.

Defaults to scope="all" because a workflow built from subgraphs keeps almost everything that can break inside them; checking only the top level would pass a graph that cannot run.

Each finding names the node and, where there is one, a fix - the other workspace tools are what applies it: set_workspace_links to rewire, set_workspace_values to bring a value into range, set_workspace_node_modes to un-mute, add_workspace_node to replace something missing.

A clean report is not a promise the run will succeed: ComfyUI validates more at queue time, and a value can be legal and still wrong.

Args: scope: "all", "root" or "active" - see get_workspace_graph. refresh_schemas: re-fetch /object_info first. Schemas are cached for the life of the process, so pass this after installing nodes or models. client_id: which tab to inspect; defaults to the most recently focused one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`scope`	No	all
`client_id`	No
`refresh_schemas`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it reads the live graph, checks against node schemas, reports muted/bypassed nodes, includes caching behavior for schemas, and explicitly states that it does not guarantee the run will succeed. This is thorough behavioral disclosure.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose. It is somewhat longer than the minimal needed, but each sentence adds meaningful context (e.g., node schema checks, fix tools, limitations, parameter details). No fluff or repetition.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, the description covers functionality, parameter semantics, relationship to fix tools, default behavior, and limitations. With an output schema present, there is no need to describe return values, making the description complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description explains all three parameters: scope ('all', 'root', or 'active' with reference to get_workspace_graph), refresh_schemas (re-fetch /object_info, caching lifecycle), and client_id (which tab to inspect, default behavior). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Report what is wrong with the workflow open in the browser, worst first,' a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning that 'the other workspace tools are what applies it' and listing them.

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?

Provides explicit alternatives and guidance: names set_workspace_links, set_workspace_values, etc. as the tools that apply fixes, explains why default scope='all' is set, and states that a clean report is not a promise of run success. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-rely guidance.

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

Install Server