Retrieve detailed information for a specific n8n workflow by workflowId. Use it to inspect workflow configuration and status before activating, editing, or executing it.
Get detailed information about a specific workflow
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| workflowId | Yes | The ID of the workflow to retrieve |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation via 'Get' but omits permissions, error behavior, rate limits, and what 'detailed information' actually contains, and no output schema exists to clarify returns.
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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter getter.
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?
The tool is simple and schema coverage is complete, but with no output schema the description could define what 'detailed information' includes. No annotations also leave behavioral context thin, making it minimally adequate.
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 100%, so workflowId is already fully documented by the schema. The description adds no parameter syntax or constraints beyond that baseline, making 3 appropriate.
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 ('Get') and resource ('workflow'), scoped to a specific workflow, which implicitly contrasts with list_workflows. It does not name alternatives explicitly, but the purpose is clear and distinguishable from sibling action tools.
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 on when to use this tool versus list_workflows, get_execution, or other siblings, nor any prerequisites such as permissions. The description only implies usage by saying it retrieves a specific workflow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.