workflow_getRetrieve a single Drupal workflow by its ID to inspect configuration, states, and transitions for content moderation or automation tasks.
Get a single workflow by ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include | No | ||
| workflow_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get', which implies read-only, but does not disclose error behavior (e.g., not found), permission requirements, or any other operational trait. Nothing beyond the verb is communicated.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the essential action and target immediately.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple get-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain the 'include' parameter, ID format, or read-only nature, and with no annotations the agent lacks behavioral context beyond the operation name.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%. The description mentions 'by ID', which maps to the required workflow_id parameter, but adds no format details. The optional 'include' parameter is entirely undocumented, leaving half the parameters without any semantic guidance.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (workflow) and indicates scope (single, by ID). This implicitly distinguishes it from workflow_list, but does not explicitly name the sibling or contrast the two.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus workflow_list or other workflow-related tools. The phrase 'by ID' hints at a precondition but provides no explicit alternatives or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.