Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
n8n-guard

n8n-guard

by flow-84
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Retention report

retention_report

Reports stored execution records, their age range, and the space a retention window would free without deleting data. Use it to plan pruning and understand datastore growth.

Instructions

How many execution records are stored, how far back they go, and what pruning to a retention window would free. Read-only: n8n-guard never deletes anything.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "retention_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keep_daysNoRetention window to evaluate, in days. Defaults to 30.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does disclose the most important trait: it never deletes anything, so pruning is only simulated. It does not say whether large datasets make the call slow, nor anything about the shape of the returned report.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences with no filler; the substantive output description comes first and the safety caveat second. Every clause earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-optional-parameter reporting tool with no output schema, the description covers what is measured and the non-destructive guarantee. A brief note on what the report output looks like would close the remaining gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and keep_days is already documented with its default and exclusivity bound. The description ties the parameter to the concept of a 'retention window', which adds a little framing, but nothing about units beyond days or behavior at the edges.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names the concrete resource (execution records) and the three specific things reported: stored count, age range, and space freed by a hypothetical retention window. That distinguishes it from sibling tools like db_health and stuck_executions, though it does not name any alternative explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the pre-pruning sizing tool, but there is no explicit 'use this when you want to X, not Y' guidance. The read-only note helps orient intent but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools