n8n_list_workflows

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It confirms the operation is a read (listing), which is non-destructive, and mentions return fields. However, it does not specify if there is any filtering beyond the optional limit parameter, or if pagination is handled.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. The first sentence clearly states the action, and the second adds useful detail about return values. Could be slightly more concise by combining, but still efficient.

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 has only 2 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately conveys the basic function and return fields. It lacks details on error handling, permissions required, or whether the listing is paginated, but meets minimum viability for this simple tool.

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%, meaning both parameters are already described in the schema. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., default server behavior, limit meaning). Baseline 3 is 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?

The description specifies the verb 'list' and the resource 'workflows on an n8n server', and distinguishes from siblings by noting the return fields (names, IDs, active status, node counts), making its purpose clear and distinct.

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 implies usage for listing workflows, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives like n8n_get_workflow (single workflow) or n8n_list_executions. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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