n8n-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Requires write_mode', hinting at permission needs, but lacks details on whether the deletion is permanent, reversible, has side effects, rate limits, or error handling. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is extremely concise with two short sentences, front-loading the core action and a key requirement. Every word serves a purpose, with no wasted text or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive operation), lack of annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It misses critical behavioral details like permanence or effects, though the output schema may cover return values. It's minimally adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

The description doesn't add parameter details beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. However, with only one parameter ('credential_id'), the schema's title 'Credential Id' provides basic clarity, and the description's focus on the action compensates minimally. Baseline is high due to low parameter count.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete') and target resource ('a credential'), which is specific and unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_tag', 'delete_variable', or 'delete_workflow' beyond the resource type, missing explicit distinction.

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?

It provides some guidance by mentioning 'Requires write_mode', which implies a prerequisite context for usage. However, it doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_credential' or 'list_credentials', nor does it outline exclusions or detailed scenarios.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.