n8n_health_check

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the tool checks health and API connectivity, and explains the two modes (status vs diagnostic). It does not contradict annotations and provides useful operational insight.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every word adds value. No unnecessary information.

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 explains the two modes and hints at output (health info, env vars, tool status). However, without an output schema, more explicit detail on return structure would improve completeness. Still, it covers the essential context for a simple health check 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 coverage is 100% and both parameters are described in the schema. The description adds a use-case hint ('Use mode='diagnostic' for detailed troubleshooting'), which slightly adds value, but does not significantly extend beyond what the schema already provides.

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 explicitly states 'Check n8n instance health and API connectivity', which is a specific verb+resource combination. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on workflows, nodes, templates, etc.

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 advises using mode='diagnostic' for detailed troubleshooting, providing clear context on when to use each mode. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives, no other sibling tool serves the health check purpose, so this is sufficient.

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