Discover n8n API Capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context beyond these by noting it uses the current API key and shows accessible endpoints/scopes, which is helpful for understanding its scope and permission implications. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a practical use case. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 zero-parameter discovery tool with comprehensive annotations, the description is complete: it states what is returned (capability map), how it is scoped (current API key), and when it is useful (debugging permissions). No output schema exists, but the description adequately conveys the expected result.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is needed by focusing solely on the output capability map, and no parameter documentation is required.

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 ('Get') and resource ('capability map for the current API key'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling operational tools like n8n_list_workflows or n8n_delete_execution. It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 explicitly states a use case: 'Useful for debugging permission issues.' This provides clear context for when to apply it, though it does not mention alternatives or exclusions. Since no sibling tool provides similar discovery functionality, explicit alternatives are not necessary.

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