langgenius/dify
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/langgenius/dify.git synced 2026-07-23 04:55:28 -04:00
Code Issues 775 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Workflow as Tool is obsolete #18945

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-21 19:53:50 -05:00 by yindo · 0 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-21 19:53:50 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @DavideDelbianco on GitHub (Oct 9, 2025).

Self Checks

  • I have read the Contributing Guide and Language Policy.
  • I have searched for existing issues search for existing issues, including closed ones.
  • I confirm that I am using English to submit this report, otherwise it will be closed.
  • Please do not modify this template :) and fill in all the required fields.

1. Is this request related to a challenge you're experiencing? Tell me about your story.

After the release of MCP, the workflow as tool has become obsolete.

It does the same thing as MCP, but it is harder to manage when sharing workflows because it exports the internal GUID unlike MCP that exports the server name / tool name as provider identity.

MCP also allows publishing chatflows, something that "workflow" as tool cannot do.

I suggest to:

  • remove that obsolete functionality
  • add a toggle when publishing MCP server to choose if they have the "public" endpoint too
  • make published MCP servers available as tools within dify, without having to add them as MCP tools copying the public URL
  • MCP tools generated this way, use internal routing instead of going out on the internet

2. Additional context or comments

No response

3. Can you help us with this feature?

  • I am interested in contributing to this feature.
Originally created by @DavideDelbianco on GitHub (Oct 9, 2025). ### Self Checks - [x] I have read the [Contributing Guide](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) and [Language Policy](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues/1542). - [x] I have searched for existing issues [search for existing issues](https://github.com/langgenius/dify/issues), including closed ones. - [x] I confirm that I am using English to submit this report, otherwise it will be closed. - [x] Please do not modify this template :) and fill in all the required fields. ### 1. Is this request related to a challenge you're experiencing? Tell me about your story. After the release of MCP, the workflow as tool has become obsolete. It does the same thing as MCP, but it is harder to manage when sharing workflows because it exports the internal GUID unlike MCP that exports the server name / tool name as provider identity. MCP also allows publishing chatflows, something that "workflow" as tool cannot do. I suggest to: - remove that obsolete functionality - add a toggle when publishing MCP server to choose if they have the "public" endpoint too - make published MCP servers available as tools within dify, without having to add them as MCP tools copying the public URL - MCP tools generated this way, use internal routing instead of going out on the internet ### 2. Additional context or comments _No response_ ### 3. Can you help us with this feature? - [ ] I am interested in contributing to this feature.
yindo added the 💪 enhancement🌊 feat:workflow labels 2026-02-21 19:53:50 -05:00
yindo closed this issue 2026-02-21 19:53:50 -05:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
Knowledge Pipeline
Proposal
WIP
cloud
dependencies
feat:webapp
good first issue
outdated
performance
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 python:uv
refactor
size:L
stale
status: accepting prs
status: blocked
status: in discussion
stt & tts
vulnerablity
web
wont-fix
🌊 feat:workflow
🌚 invalid
🐞 bug
👻 feat:rag
💪 enhancement
📚 documentation
🔨 feat:tools
🙋‍♂️ question
🙏 help wanted
🤔 cant-reproduce
🤖 feat:agent
No Label 🌊 feat:workflow 💪 enhancement
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
yindo
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: langgenius/dify#18945
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?