n8n_activate_workflow

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the action (activate/deactivate) without disclosing side effects (e.g., stopping executions on deactivation), authentication needs, or rate limits. The behavior beyond the verb is opaque.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. Every word is meaningful, but it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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's simplicity (3 params, no output schema), the description lacks context about the effect on workflow state (e.g., active runs triggers; deactivated pauses) and dependencies (workflow must exist). An agent might not know to validate the workflow ID or handle server_name defaults.

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%, with each parameter already documented (e.g., 'true to activate, false to deactivate'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 'Activate or deactivate an n8n workflow,' specifying the verb (activate/deactivate) and the resource (n8n workflow). This distinguishes the tool from siblings like n8n_create_workflow, n8n_delete_workflow, and n8n_set_safety_mode, which handle other operations.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., n8n_update_workflow, n8n_restore_workflow). There is no mention of prerequisites such as requiring the workflow to exist or being already active/deactive, nor any exclusions.

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