n8n_list_workflows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists workflows, but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, whether pagination is involved, what data fields are returned for each workflow, or any potential side effects. This is a significant gap for a tool with no other behavioral metadata.

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 a single, concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose. There is no redundant or extraneous information, and it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally viable but lacks detail about the return value. It does not specify whether the response contains full workflow objects, summaries, or just IDs, which could be important for an agent deciding how to process the result. Given the simple nature, a score of 3 reflects the clear gap in return-value information.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. The action 'list all' sufficiently conveys the operation without requiring parameter details.

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 'Listar todos los workflows de n8n' clearly states the tool lists all n8n workflows, using a specific verb (list) and resource (workflows). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like n8n_get_workflow, which retrieves a single workflow, and n8n_list_credentials, which lists credentials.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that n8n_get_workflow should be used for a specific workflow, nor does it mention any exclusions (e.g., returns summaries only). The usage context is merely implied by the tool name and description.

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