Skip to main content
Glama
DrBalls

n8n MCP Server

by DrBalls
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Remote

Retry n8n Execution

n8n_retry_execution

Retry failed n8n workflow executions by providing the execution ID to create a new execution attempt.

Instructions

Retry a failed execution.

Args:

  • id (string): Execution ID to retry

Returns: The new execution created from the retry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesThe unique identifier of the resource

Implementation Reference

  • src/tools/executions.ts:262-269 (handler)
    The handler function that executes the retry logic by calling the n8n API.
    async (params: z.infer<typeof IdParamSchema>) => {
  const execution = await post<N8nExecution>(`/executions/${params.id}/retry`);
  
  return {
    content: [{ type: 'text', text: `🔄 Execution retry started.\n\n${formatExecution(execution)}` }],
    structuredContent: execution
  };
}
  • src/tools/executions.ts:243-270 (registration)
    Registration of the n8n_retry_execution tool.
      server.registerTool(
    'n8n_retry_execution',
    {
      title: 'Retry n8n Execution',
      description: `Retry a failed execution.

Args:
  - id (string): Execution ID to retry

Returns:
  The new execution created from the retry.`,
      inputSchema: IdParamSchema,
      annotations: {
        readOnlyHint: false,
        destructiveHint: false,
        idempotentHint: false,
        openWorldHint: false
      }
    },
    async (params: z.infer<typeof IdParamSchema>) => {
      const execution = await post<N8nExecution>(`/executions/${params.id}/retry`);
      
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: `🔄 Execution retry started.\n\n${formatExecution(execution)}` }],
        structuredContent: execution
      };
    }
  );

Tool Definition Quality

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation, which the description aligns with by implying mutation ('Retry') without contradiction. The description adds that it creates a new execution, providing useful context beyond annotations, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., if the original execution is modified), permissions, or error conditions.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. It's efficient with minimal waste, though the Args/Returns formatting could be slightly more integrated into natural language for better flow.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's moderate complexity (mutating operation with one parameter) and lack of output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the action and return value but omits details like error handling, execution state requirements, or how the new execution relates to the original, leaving gaps for an agent to infer.

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

Parameters3/5

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

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents the 'id' parameter. The description adds no additional semantic context about the parameter (e.g., where to find the ID, format expectations, or validation rules), so it meets the baseline of 3 without adding value beyond the schema.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the action ('Retry a failed execution') and specifies the resource ('execution'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like 'n8n_stop_execution' or 'n8n_get_execution' beyond the obvious retry vs. stop/get distinction.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., that the execution must be in a failed state), nor does it clarify relationships with tools like 'n8n_list_executions' (to find failed executions) or 'n8n_run_workflow' (for initial runs).

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/DrBalls/n8n-mcp-server-v2'

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