n8n_restore_workflow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions overwriting but fails to disclose potential data loss, required permissions, or side effects like backup deletion. This is insufficient for a potentially destructive operation.

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 with no unnecessary words. The core action and key differentiation are front-loaded efficiently.

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?

Covers main use cases (new vs. overwrite) and references backup sources. Lacks handling of errors, validation, or what happens after restore, but is reasonably complete for a simple restore tool with no output schema.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that backup_path comes from n8n_list_backups or mutation output and explaining the role of target_workflow_id, exceeding schema-only information.

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 action 'restore a workflow from a local backup', specifying the resource and source. It distinguishes default behavior (new workflow) from overwriting, differentiating it from siblings like create_workflow, update_workflow, import_workflow, and list_backups.

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 clear guidance on when to use target_workflow_id (to overwrite) and default behavior (create new). Does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the usage is implied effectively.

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