List Workflows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds meaningful details beyond the schema: the default of 100 results, n8n's hard cap of 250 per request, and a caveat about truncated results. This gives the agent useful expectations about limiting and pagination behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose and filters; the following sentences add only necessary behavioral caveats. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

For a low-complexity list tool with an output schema, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: what it lists, how to filter, how many results to expect, and the hard limit caveat. No required parameters exist, so no prerequisite guidance is needed.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters, and it does. It maps 'name' to a filter, 'tags' to comma-separated tag filtering, 'active' to active-status filtering, and 'limit' to result count with the 250 cap. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List n8n workflows.' It also names the filtering dimensions (active status, name, tags), making the operation unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings like get_workflow or list_executions.

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 clearly implies its use case: retrieving a collection of workflows with optional filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is clear enough that an agent can select it for listing workflows without confusing it with other operations.

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