Retry execution

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

The description adds key behavioral context beyond annotations: side effects ('A retry may repeat earlier external effects'), loadWorkflow semantics, and return shape ('returns metadata without payload values'). This complements the annotation hints (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false) without contradiction.

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 three sentences, tightly packed with essential information, front-loaded with the core purpose. No redundant phrases; every sentence adds value.

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 (mutation with side effects, permissions, alternatives, return type), the description covers all critical aspects: retryability conditions, data source, loadWorkflow behavior, external effects, alternative tool, and permission requirements. Output schema exists, so return-value details are not needed.

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?

Even though schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaning for both parameters: it clarifies executionId provenance (from get/list) and explains the loadWorkflow distinction ('true uses the currently saved workflow, while false uses the original execution snapshot'), which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 opens with 'Retry one saved execution that has retry data and did not finish successfully', using a specific verb and resource, and clearly delineates the tool's scope from siblings like delete, stop, get, and list. This distinguishes it effectively.

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?

Explicitly states when retry is rejected ('n8n rejects queued/new executions and successful finished executions'), gives the source for executionId ('comes from n8n_executions_get or list'), points to an alternative tool ('use stop for a running execution'), and lists prerequisites ('requires unsafe mode and retry permission'). This is comprehensive guidance.

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