Skip to main content
Glama

promote_workspace_inputs

Promote subgraph inputs to the parent workspace, exposing them for external wiring and control.

Instructions

Expose an inner node's inputs on the face of the subgraph that holds it.

A subgraph with nothing promoted is a sealed box: the values that drive it can only be reached by going inside, and nothing outside can be wired to it. This is what ComfyUI offers as "Promote widget" on a widget's context menu, and it is the difference between a subgraph that is usable from the outside and one that merely hides its contents.

Both kinds of input take the same path. A widget row (steps, cfg) becomes a widget on the subgraph node's face; a plain socket (image, model) becomes a socket that can be wired to. Name them the same way either way.

The id names both ends. 98:12 is node 12 inside subgraph node 98, and the input is exposed on 98. There is no separate "which subgraph" argument and no need to navigate inside first. To carry something further out, ask again with the shorter id - each level is its own step, and its own entry in the reply.

One call is one Ctrl+Z. Nothing is written unless every named input resolves, so a typo refuses the batch rather than half-applying it.

Args: promote: which inputs to expose, as {":": [names]}. An input already exposed is reported in skipped, not an error. An input already wired to something inside the subgraph is refused, since promoting it would replace that link. demote: which to take off again, same shape. A boundary slot with something wired into it from outside is disconnected rather than removed, so the outer link survives. client_id: which browser tab to act in; defaults to the most recently focused one.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
demoteNo
promoteNo
client_idNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses what happens to widget inputs vs socket inputs, how ids map to both ends, atomicity ('Nothing is written unless every named input resolves'), skipped vs refused promote cases, and demote's disconnect-instead-of-remove behavior. This is far richer than typical tool descriptions.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the core action, then adds conceptual context, id semantics, atomicity, and organized parameter explanations. The Args block makes the parameter details scannable without redundant filler.

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?

This is a conceptually complex tool involving nested subgraph ids, two input kinds, promote/demote operations, and atomic behavior. The description covers all of these, including edge cases like already-exposed inputs, wired inputs, and outer links surviving demotion. An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required.

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?

The schema provides only bare object/string types with defaults, so the description is the sole source of meaning. It precisely defines the promote/demote shape as {"<subgraph node>:<node>": [names]}, explains skipped/refused outcomes, wired-input refusal, demote disconnection semantics, and client_id default behavior.

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 opening sentence names the exact operation and resource: 'Expose an inner node's inputs on the face of the subgraph that holds it.' It further clarifies by distinguishing widget promotion from plain socket promotion and referencing ComfyUI's 'Promote widget', so the purpose is unambiguous and differentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives strong contextual guidance: sealed-box subgraphs need promotion to be usable externally, nested promotion is done step-by-step with shorter ids, and demote is the inverse operation. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the unique purpose and clear examples make usage conditions evident.

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/pytraveler/local-comfyui-mcp'

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