Workflow
Process, description, execution
An arrangement of activities and control rules for carrying out a process. Distinguish the process, its description, and the system that executes it. [3] [1] Editorial interpretation
On this page
Definition comparison
WfMC terminology
Institutional; business automation
WfMC describes partial or complete business-process automation, with work or information passed between participants under procedural rules. [1] [2]
Workflow Patterns
Peer-reviewed; control flow
A process definition specifies activities and routing; an instance enacts that definition for a particular case. The paper evaluates static control-flow patterns. [3]
LLM engineering
First-party; narrower architecture
Anthropic calls predefined code paths coordinating LLMs and tools workflows, and contrasts them with model-directed agents. This is an architectural convention within LLM applications. [13]
Scope
This entry uses Workflow broadly for research and engineering. WfMC places it in business-process automation; its narrower historical definition does not itself define every scientific or Python workflow. [1] [14] Editorial interpretation
Includes
- Editorial example: a deterministic Python load → validate → transform → save pipeline has activities, dependencies and a completion condition. An LLM is unnecessary for our broader working usage. [14] Editorial interpretation
- Editorial example: a fixed retrieve → summarize → verify LLM pipeline is a workflow even when individual model outputs vary. Fixed control flow does not imply deterministic outputs. [13] Editorial interpretation
Excludes and counterexamples
Different usages and open boundaries
- Workflow may name a process arrangement, a stored definition, or a run in casual usage. State which object is meant before comparing implementations. [3] Editorial interpretation
- Predefined paths are not a universal requirement: WfMC distinguishes production workflows from ad-hoc workflows whose procedural rules can change during execution. [2]
- The 2003 patterns cover static control flow, not all resource allocation, exceptions or transaction semantics. Do not treat their scope as a universal exclusion rule. [3]
Workflow and execution governance
Sequence, dependencies, branches and loops describe the process. Validation and retry can also be workflow steps; a harness may enforce shared execution policies around them. This overlap does not make Harness a Workflow subtype. See the paired comparison in Harness for the schema-extraction example. [3] [20] [14] Editorial interpretation
Operational criteria
Repository test: identify a purpose, activities, dependencies or transition rules, and a completion or termination condition. Label the artifact as description, execution instance or executor. These are editorial criteria, not a quoted standard. [14] Editorial interpretation
Concept relationships
Only is-a means a strict subtype. Uses and supports/orchestrates describe composition and control.
An LLM workflow uses an LLM for one or more tasks; many workflows use no language model. [13] Editorial interpretation
A designed workflow may delegate an activity to an agent; this is composition, not a claim that every workflow is agentic. [14] Editorial interpretation
Repository working definition
Repository · Proposed / not certified
Use Workflow for an organized process with explicit coordination rules, independent of whether its tasks are manual, deterministic code or model calls. Keep the executor separate from the process it realizes. [14]
No consensus decision recorded.
Sources and research gaps
Research notes
Institutional scope gap: the historical WfMC definition concerns business automation. The broader Python example and our minimum operational test are explicit Repository proposals.
Retrieval limitation: indexed original excerpts verified the WfMC cover, glossary version and relevant definitions; direct retrieval of the two WfMC PDFs failed.
- Workflow and Internet: Catalysts for Radical Change
Workflow Management Coalition. Tier 1 / Institutional white paper
June 1998. Page 8, Workflow Assists Business Processes. Accessed 2026-10-10.
Context: Business-process automation; quotes the WfMC glossary.
Verification: Cover and page 8 verified through indexed excerpts of the original PDF and the official publication catalogue. Direct PDF retrieval failed; no claim of full-document review.
- Terminology & Glossary
Workflow Management Coalition. Tier 1 / Institutional terminology specification
WfMC-TC-1011, Issue 3.0, February 1999. Page 8, Workflow; process definition and enactment usage. Accessed 2026-10-10.
Context: Production and ad-hoc business workflow.
Verification: Version and page 8 verified in indexed original excerpts and the official publication catalogue. Direct PDF retrieval failed.
- High-Level Requirements: Health IT Test Infrastructure
NIST Information Technology Laboratory. Tier 1 / Institutional engineering description
Created July 14, 2016; updated April 8, 2026. High-Level Requirements; Test Infrastructure System Components, Test Harness Component. Accessed 2026-10-11.
Context: Healthcare interoperability and conformance testing, not a universal definition of every harness. Demonstrates a non-LLM execution and orchestration harness.
Verification: Read the original NIST page, including the test-harness/workflow-management descriptions and creation/update dates.
- Workflow Patterns
Wil M. P. van der Aalst, Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede, Bartek Kiepuszewski and Alistair P. Barros. Tier 2 / Peer-reviewed journal article
Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1), 5-51; DOI 10.1023/A:1022883727209. Section 2, printed page 9; static-control-flow scope on page 8. Accessed 2026-10-10.
Context: Business workflow control-flow patterns; not an exhaustive theory of every process.
Verification: Final published PDF read; peer-review status, journal and DOI checked against the TU/e publication record.
- Building effective agents
Anthropic. Tier 3 / First-party engineering blog
19 December 2024; live page includes subsequent tooling updates. What are agents?; Building blocks, workflows, and agents. Accessed 2026-10-10.
Context: Company-specific distinction between predefined LLM workflows and dynamic agents.
Verification: Original text and publication record checked 2026-10-10.
- Repository terminology guide
Repository internal proposal. Tier 4 / Repository internal proposal; not certified
Repository proposal 1.3 / not certified. Term-specific proposal sections and editorial policy. Accessed 2026-10-12.
Context: Internal proposals and editorial interpretations, not external consensus.
Verification: Versions 1.1 and 1.2 add the Schema proposal and the flow/governance experimental example while preserving prior proposal sections. All remain unratified; no adoption decision claimed. Version 1.3 changes branding and certification scope only; it does not certify any proposal.
Revision record
- 1.0 / 2026-10-10
Researched and rewritten with attributed definitions, typed relations and an unratified Repository proposal.
- 1.1 / 2026-10-11
Add the cited flow/governance comparison, overlap boundaries and illustrative experiment; Repository meaning remains proposed.
- 1.2 / 2026-10-12
Scope the working definition and certification labels to this repository under Open AI Glossary. Citations and proposed status remain unchanged.