n8n_list_workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return schema (id, name, etc.) but doesn't mention pagination, sort order, or that it's a read-only operation. 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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the verb 'List'. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers return fields, the 4 parameters are fully described in the schema, and a sibling alternative is mentioned. However, it lacks details on default sorting or pagination beyond the limit parameter.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions, which are already clear. No parameter info in the description that isn't already in 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 lists workflows with optional filters and specifies the returned fields (id, name, active state, tags, updatedAt). It explicitly distinguishes from n8n_get_workflow by directing users to that sibling for full definitions.

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: it lists workflows with filters and points to n8n_get_workflow when full definition is needed. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or list exclusions, the alternative is clearly named.

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