n8n_stop_execution

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose whether stopping is reversible (vs. retry), what happens to partial execution data, error behavior if already stopped, or whether this is a graceful or forceful termination. Critical gaps for an interruption 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 is appropriately brief, but the '[UNIFIED]' metadata tag wastes space without adding value. Given the complete lack of annotations and schema descriptions, the description is actually too concise—missing essential context that cannot be inferred elsewhere.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and 0% parameter coverage, the description needed substantial behavioral and parameter documentation. It provides only the basic action verb. Incomplete for safely invoking a workflow interruption tool.

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 has 0% description coverage for both 'site' and 'execution_id' parameters. The description adds zero semantic information about what 'site' refers to (instance URL? project name?), the format of execution_id, or how to obtain valid values. Complete failure to compensate for undocumented schema.

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 stops a 'currently running execution' using specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like n8n_delete_execution and n8n_retry_execution. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise but doesn't obscure the core purpose.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. The phrase 'currently running' implies a state precondition but doesn't clarify when to prefer this over delete_execution or what happens to stopped executions. No mention of prerequisites like requiring active workflow permissions.

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