n8n_get_execution

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses what information is returned (status, timing, node outputs), but omits details about caching, rate limits, error behaviors, or whether this is a read-only operation.

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?

Single sentence with information front-loaded. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is unnecessary metadata that slightly reduces clarity, but the core description is efficient and focused.

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 3-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description partially compensates by describing the return contents (status, timing, outputs). However, the lack of parameter documentation and behavioral context leaves notable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate. While 'execution_id' is implied by 'specific execution', the description fails to explain 'site' (format/expected values) or 'include_data' (what data is included/excluded when toggled).

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 tool retrieves detailed execution information including status, timing, and node outputs. However, it doesn't distinguish from the sibling tool 'n8n_get_execution_data', which could cause selection confusion.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'n8n_list_executions' (for searching) or 'n8n_get_execution_data' (which appears similar). No mention of prerequisites or error conditions.

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