n8n_workflow_versions

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: rollback creates a backup, prune keeps N most recent versions, and old backups are automatically pruned. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful context beyond them.

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 front-loaded with the overall purpose, followed by bullet-style mode explanations. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It is concise and well-structured, allowing quick scanning.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, 5 modes, no output schema), the description covers all modes, parameter requirements, and automatic pruning behavior. It does not detail return values or error handling, but the schema and context signals fill gaps. Overall, it is sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description enriches semantics by specifying mode-specific requirements (e.g., workflowId required for list, rollback, delete, prune) and explaining behavior like validation before rollback and deleteAll flag. This adds meaning beyond the 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's purpose: 'Manage workflow version history, rollback, and cleanup.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing specifically on versioning operations, and enumerates five distinct modes (list, get, rollback, delete, prune) that cover the functionality.

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?

The description provides clear context for each mode (e.g., 'list: Show version history for a workflow') and notes that versions are scoped to the n8n instance. It does not explicitly state when to use alternative sibling tools (e.g., n8n_delete_workflow for deleting workflows), but the mode descriptions sufficiently guide appropriate usage.

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