n8n: Wait for execution

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safety profile, and the description adds real behavior beyond that: the call blocks in a polling loop and returns the final status plus output. However, it omits the most consequential behavior for a blocking tool—what happens on timeout, whether the call errors or returns a still-running status, and how poll_interval/timeout interact.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action front-loaded and no filler. The unexplained '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise the reader cannot act on, which keeps it from a 5.

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 blocking poll with a 60-second default timeout and no output schema, the description gives the barest sufficient picture: it polls, it completes, it returns status and output. The missing timeout/failure semantics are a genuine gap for an agent deciding whether to call this synchronously.

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% across four parameters, so the description carries the full burden and contributes nothing—no explanation of site scoping, execution_id format, poll_interval units, or timeout behavior. The parameter names are largely self-evident and defaults appear in the schema, which keeps this above a 1.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: poll an execution until it completes, returning final status and output. That clearly separates it from a one-shot fetch, though it never names n8n_get_execution or n8n_get_execution_data, so differentiation is only implied by 'until it completes'.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternative (a single get_execution call). The agent must infer that this is the blocking variant, and nothing warns about when polling is wasteful or unnecessary.

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