n8n_get_workflow

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

Discloses a key behavioral trait: resolves against live workflow, not the raw entity row. However, with no annotations, it should also mention error handling, auth requirements, or rate limits. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant information. The description is front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence serves a purpose.

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 no output schema, the description hints at return values ('metadata and optionally the full node graph'), which is sufficient for a simple fetch. The context about live vs entity is valuable. Could elaborate on error responses but overall 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 baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining where to get the id ('from n8n_list_workflows') and providing usage context for includeDefinition parameter. This exceeds the baseline.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Fetch' and resource 'single n8n workflow by id'. Differentiates from sibling list/diff tools by specifying it returns metadata and optionally the full node graph.

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?

Provides guidance on when to enable includeDefinition ('when you need to inspect or edit') and notes that it resolves against the live workflow. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with siblings like n8n_audit.

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