Delete n8n Execution

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true and readOnlyHint: false, so the description's 'Permanently delete' reinforces but does not significantly extend this. It adds the detail 'and its data' to clarify the scope of deletion, which is useful context beyond the annotation. However, it does not mention irreversibility, permissions, or error behavior, so the extra disclosure is limited.

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 exceptionally concise: one sentence stating the action and an Args list that repeats the schema field. Every element earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded in the first sentence.

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 simple single-parameter delete tool with strong annotations (destructiveHint: true) and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and scope. It could mention that deletion is irreversible, but the word 'permanently' already covers that. No major gaps for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The input schema already provides complete coverage: the 'id' parameter has a description ('Execution ID to delete') that matches the description's Args section exactly. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no new semantic meaning, resulting in 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 the tool's function: 'Permanently delete a specific execution and its data.' It uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('execution'), and the qualifier 'permanently' distinguishes it from non-destructive execution tools like retry or stop. The name and title align, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 implies usage through the verb 'delete' and the explicit mention of a specific execution, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., stop_execution for non-destructive actions). No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given, making it a minimal viable guideline.

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