Post-Build Flow

Use this skill after build-workflow succeeds on a direct orchestrator build, especially when the build result contains postBuildFlow.required: true, or when the current message contains <workflow-verification-follow-up> or <workflow-setup-required>.

One-off builds (postBuildFlow.reason: "direct-one-off-build-succeeded") hand off to the one-off-operations skill instead — verification is optional there and completion is a live run with read-back. If both sets of instructions are in context for a one-off build, the one-off flow wins.

These instructions are in English, but user-visible text you write while following them stays in the user's conversation language.

For trigger inputData shapes, read ${N8N_WORKSPACE_DIR}/knowledge-base/reference/trigger-input-data-shapes.md in the sandbox workspace when available, or load this skill's references/trigger-input-data-shapes.md linked file.

Setup panel

Use this section when the system prompt describes the persistent setup panel, setup returns announced: true, or the current user input contains <workflow-test-request>. Otherwise, keep the setup card flow below.

• Setup requirements can appear while the workflow is being built. The user can complete them immediately. Refer to the "setup panel" without a position or a claim that setup must wait until the build finishes.
• Verify what the build can simulate before asking the user to finish setup. Missing credentials do not prevent this verification. Report which outputs were simulated. A simulated result does not prove a live connection.
• When setup returns announced: true, summarize the open items and any validation warnings. End the turn. The user can complete setup in the panel while chat stays available. Do not wait, poll, or open a trigger-test card.
• On a later user turn, trust <workflow-setup-state> over earlier setup results. If items settled, none remain open, and there are no validation warnings, verify the current saved configuration with verify-built-workflow. It refreshes the credential plan. Report remaining simulations or connection failures. Do not claim live success from the earlier build result.
• <workflow-test-request> in the current user input means the user clicked Execute. A block in conversation history does not request another execution. Use the workflow ID in the current block. Inspect its current <workflow-setup-state> and read the saved workflow with workflows(action="get-as-code"). Do not call workflows(action="setup") for this precheck. It announces setup and ends the turn. If the target is absent from the state block, inspect its saved configuration. If required setup cannot be confirmed, report what is missing and end the turn. If required items remain open for this workflow, report them and end the turn without a live run. Otherwise, use executions(action="run") with suitable trigger input. The user has already requested this test; do not ask whether they want it. The execution tool still enforces its approval policy. Do not publish the workflow to test it.
• Read the execution output and summarize what ran and what it returned. For failures, inspect executions(action="debug"). Fix the same workflow when possible. Use the current saved source so panel edits are preserved. Report unresolved setup or failures in chat. Before another live run, inspect the successful effect nodes from the failed run. Follow Cleaning up after a live test for any artifacts they left behind. After a repair and that artifact check, test the updated workflow and inspect its output. Do not substitute mocked verification for the requested execution.

A setup card that was already open keeps its apply and trigger-test resume flow. Its result is not a panel announcement unless it has announced: true.

Verification follow-up

When the current message contains <workflow-verification-follow-up>, verify immediately from the payload's obligation — do not acknowledge first. If the obligation is ready_to_verify or verifying, call verify-built-workflow. Do not call workflows(action="setup") in this turn and do not declare the workflow finished if outcome.setupRequirement.status === "required" — setup is routed automatically as a separate <workflow-setup-required> step after verification. For a multi-trigger outcome, verify every trigger that does not yet have a recorded successful verification. Make all of these calls in this turn.

Setup follow-up

When the current message contains <workflow-setup-required>, your first action is to call workflows(action="setup") with the workflowId from the payload. Do not verify, do not ask, do not write a message first — the inline setup card in the n8n Assistant panel is the user-visible surface. If the result has announced: true, use the persistent panel instructions above and end the turn. If it returns deferred: true, respect the user's choice and do not retry with any other setup tool. A result carrying skippedByUser names credentials the user already passed on: never re-open setup for those, in this turn or any later one — see Credentials the user skipped. After setup completes or is applied, follow Mocked verification live-test follow-up if the payload or prior verification evidence says mocked credentials, simulated node output, fixture overrides, temporary pin data, or another mocked input was used.

Choosing the credential type for a service

Pick in this order:

1. A dedicated credential type (slackApi, notionApi, …) whenever one exists — search with credentials(action="search-types").
2. Simplified Custom Auth (httpTemplatedCustomAuth) for any service without a dedicated type whose auth is expressible as header/query/body values — which covers API keys and bearer tokens (Authorization: Bearer <token> becomes {"headers":{"Authorization":"Bearer {{api_key}}"}}, not httpBearerAuth). Always provide a recipe (below) so the user only pastes their secret.
3. Plain generic types (httpBasicAuth, httpDigestAuth, oAuth2Api, …) only for what a template cannot express: basic auth's base64-encoded pair, digest's challenge-response, OAuth flows — or when the user explicitly asks for a specific plain type: an explicit user choice wins (setup accepts it with allowPlainGenericAuth: true).

Credential recipes for Simplified Custom Auth

When the workflow authenticates a service through Simplified Custom Auth, include credentialHints in the same workflows(action="setup") call so the setup card pre-fills the credential and the user only pastes their secret — instead of facing an empty JSON template they'd have to decode from the provider's docs. Before composing the hints, load the credential-recipe-research skill and execute its lookup procedure — the template, docsUrl and testUrl must come from the provider documentation it has you fetch, never from memory:

• template — the auth request parts (headers/qs/body) exactly as documented, with {{placeholder}} markers where the user's values go.
• placeholders — one entry per marker: name, user-facing title, an optional info clarifying the value itself — its format or which of the provider's tokens it is (e.g. "Starts with tvly-"). Never where to obtain it, and never a URL or domain: the user asks the n8n Assistant for that from the credential form. type is password unless clearly non-secret (at least one placeholder must stay password). Add optional: true only when the provider documents the value as optional (e.g. an org/region qualifier) — template entries referencing an empty optional placeholder are omitted from the request.
• docsUrl — the provider page where a logged-in user CREATES/COPIES the secret (e.g. https://replicate.com/account/api-tokens) — never the API reference. Not shown in the form: the n8n Assistant help thread uses it to send the user to the exact page. Found via the credential-recipe-research procedure; omit when it finds nothing conclusive.
• testUrl — a documented side-effect-free GET that rejects a bad key with 401/403, used to verify the credential on save and later retests; never one of the workflow's own endpoints, never anything billable. Found via the credential-recipe-research procedure; omit when nothing qualifies — a credential without a testUrl saves fine and honestly shows "could not be verified", which beats a false green.
• acceptedStatusCodes — almost always omit; the user can adjust it later on the credential if a service's auth answers 401/403 to valid GETs.
• suggestedName — display name for the created credential.

Example — fal.ai's docs say requests use Authorization: Key <FAL_KEY> and GET https://api.fal.ai/v1/models/usage is a documented side-effect-free endpoint that rejects a bad key (the model-serving host fal.run is not a key-check endpoint):

{
	"action": "setup",
	"workflowId": "...",
	"credentialHints": [
		{
			"suggestedName": "fal.ai API Key",
			"template": {
				"headers": { "Authorization": "Key {{api_key}}" }
			},
			"placeholders": [
				{
					"name": "api_key",
					"title": "fal.ai API key",
					"info": "Key ID and secret, separated by a colon",
					"type": "password"
				}
			],
			"docsUrl": "https://fal.ai/dashboard/keys",
			"testUrl": "https://api.fal.ai/v1/models/usage"
		}
	]
}

Never put a real secret in a recipe — the user pastes it in the setup card and it is stored redacted in the credential. Add nodeName when several nodes use Simplified Custom Auth for different services. You cannot see the secret, but once setup reports the credential applied, treat it as fully configured — the {{placeholder}} markers live only in the template; the stored values replace them at request time. If a live test later fails with an auth error, that is the moment to have the user re-open the credential and re-paste the value.

If the user defers setup instead, don't hand them manual field-by-field credential instructions for the n8n editor — tell them to reopen setup when they're ready: the card pre-fills everything except their key.

Credentials the user skipped

Skipping is remembered for the whole conversation. A setup result may carry skippedByUser (nodes and credential types the user passed on), and a build outcome may carry setupRequirement.status === "not_required" with reason: "skipped-by-user". In both cases the blocking setup card is off the table for those credentials — including after later edits, rebuilds, and <workflow-setup-required> steps. Asking again is the single most common complaint about this flow.

Instead, in your normal message:

• name what stays unconfigured and what happens at runtime (e.g. "the Slack post will fail until a channel is selected; the email still sends"),
• offer to set it up whenever they want.

Only once the user asks for a specific credential — "connect Slack now", "let's do the Slack setup", or picking it out of an offer you made — call workflows(action="setup", reopenSkipped: ["slackApi"]), naming just what they asked for so the rest stays skipped. A generic "yes" to an unrelated question is not an ask.

Pass the reopenWith value the tool reported for that card, not the user's wording — a credential type for a credential card, a node name for one that was only missing a parameter. If nothing matches, setup answers with unknown_reopen_target and the list you can choose from; pick from it or tell the user what they named isn't part of this workflow. Don't fall back to re-offering, the user already asked.

Publishing and testing

Publishing is never required for testing. Both executions(action="run") and verify-built-workflow inject inputData as the trigger's output — the workflow does not need to be active. Form, webhook, chat, and other event-based triggers are all testable while the workflow is unpublished. Never publish a workflow as a precondition for running it.

Webhook input must carry the fields the workflow reads. A flat inputData becomes the request body only; query, headers and params stay empty. When any expression reads $json.query.*, $json.headers.* or $json.params.*, pass the request envelope { body: {...}, query: {...}, headers: {...}, params: {...} } (or a fixtureOverrides entry on the trigger node). Otherwise the field resolves empty, the run still succeeds, and that field is unverified — say so instead of reporting it as working.

Do not proactively offer, recommend, or mention publishing until a successful execution has run every required node on the claimed path without mocked credentials, simulated node output, fixture overrides, or temporary pin data for those nodes. A successful verification that used any of these is not publish-readiness evidence. If the user explicitly asks to publish before a live execution succeeds, warn that the live path remains untested, then follow the requested publish flow.

workflows(action="publish") enforces this. While the latest verification left nodes unreached or simulated, the call is refused and returns verificationDisclosure — the coverage facts, generated from the run. Relay those facts to the user and offer a live end-to-end test. Publish only if they still ask, by calling publish again with acknowledgeUnverified: true. Never set that flag to skip the disclosure. The user also sees the same facts in the publish approval prompt, so a summary that contradicts them is visible to them.

Execution evidence can come from a run you started or a run the user started. If the user says they ran the workflow manually, call executions(action="list", workflowId), identify the relevant run, and inspect it with executions(action="get", executionId). The user's statement alone is not execution evidence. A user-run execution satisfies the publishing gate only when the inspected result confirms success and that every required node on the claimed path ran. Do not count it if mocked, simulated, fixture, or pinned output was used. You may offer publishing after that confirmation.

For post-build verification of workflows produced by build-workflow, always verify with verify-built-workflow, never with raw executions(action="run"). It reuses the build outcome simulation plan, mocked credentials, and temporary pin data, so destructive nodes are pinned and it is safe to call repeatedly. A raw executions(action="run") runs the workflow live with no pin data, and on a workflow you just verified it surfaces a redundant run-approval prompt to the user right after verification already executed the workflow. For follow-up requests like "verify again", call verify-built-workflow with workflowId even if the original workItemId is not in context. For alternate deterministic scenarios, pass fixtureOverrides keyed by simulated node name instead of trying to force data through the trigger.

executions(action="run-step") is a debugging tool, not a verification tool. It runs one node and tells you what that node returns. It says nothing about the rest of the chain, so it never settles a verification obligation and never turns "partial coverage" into "verified". Use it to inspect one node — most often with reuseExecutionId on a node that failed a real run — and keep verifying with verify-built-workflow. A step run with mockInput proves even less: the result names the nodes whose output it invented in mockedNodeNames, and you must repeat that limitation in what you tell the user.

Reserve executions(action="run") for runs the user explicitly asked for (e.g. "run it now", "execute it against my real data"). Never call it on your own to re-test, expand coverage, or "prove the full chain" of a workflow you just built or verified: re-run verify-built-workflow instead — with triggerNodeName to reach another trigger's branch, or fixtureOverrides to reach another branch within one trigger's run — or report the partial coverage and let the user decide whether to run it. If fixtureOverrides is rejected with invalid_fixture_override, the target node was not classified as simulated in the build outcome. Do not retry the same override. If that node's data controls a branch that needs verification and you have the source file, load workflow-builder, declare representative output fixtures on the controlling upstream node, rebuild the same workflow, and verify again.

Never edit or copy a saved workflow to reach a branch. Disabling, deleting, or reordering nodes to steer a test mutates the user's workflow and leaves it broken for as long as the test runs — if it is published, its triggers fire against the broken version. Building a throwaway second workflow is no better: the evidence is gathered against a copy that can drift from the workflow the user keeps, and the copy is left behind whenever the cleanup delete fails.

For a workflow with more than one trigger (triggerNodes has multiple entries), verify once per trigger:

• Pass triggerNodeName to verify-built-workflow and call it once for each entry in triggerNodes. Naming no trigger verifies only the auto-detected one. An unresolvable name is rejected outright, so a rejected call means the name is wrong — re-read triggerNodes, never fall back to editing.
• Each pass reports nodesNotReached only for its selected trigger's main-flow branch. Coverage is the union across successful passes. Run every trigger before you report a workflow coverage gap. Different triggers can select different outputs of a shared Switch or If node.
• A failed rerun removes that trigger's earlier coverage. Verify that trigger again before you claim that the workflow is verified.
• Report each trigger and whether its branch ran. Use the combined claim to describe the result (see "Claiming success").
• When the user asked for a live run, pass triggerNodeName to executions(action="run") the same way — one run per trigger — and report each branch's result.

Fixing a workflow that is already published

The publishing rules above assume a new workflow. A repair of a workflow that is already published is different. That workflow runs in production right now, and it runs the version published before your fix. Your save creates a draft, and the draft is not live. The published version keeps running, broken, until somebody publishes the fix.

For a repair on a published workflow:

• Telling the user the fix is not live yet is not an offer to publish. Say it.
• Do NOT report the workflow as fixed, live, running, or working in production while the published version is the older one. Say the fix is in the draft.
• verify-built-workflow returns claim.liveState. live-stale means the published version is older than the draft you just verified. The result also carries liveStateNote. Relay it.
• Without a claim, call workflows(action="get", workflowId) and compare versionId (the draft) with activeVersionId (the published version). They differ while the fix is not live. A null activeVersionId means the workflow is not published at all.
• Ask whether to publish the fix. Publish only after the user agrees.
• Name the version in a retest invitation: the draft, or the published version. "Send another email to test it" is wrong when the fix is still a draft — the test would run the broken version and look like the fix failed.

After build-workflow succeeds

1. Read workflowId, workItemId, triggerNodes, verificationReadiness, setupRequirement, and postBuildFlow from the tool output. If the output is missing a workflowId, explain that the build did not submit.
   • Before treating a saved workflow as done, inspect the persisted workflow with workflows(action="get-as-code", workflowId) or read the bound workspace source file, and compare the actual graph to the user's requested outcome. Build/save success only means a workflow was saved; it does not prove the saved workflow is good.
   • If the persisted workflow is missing the requested outcome, has an obvious dead-end draft shape, or the verification evidence is weak, load the workflow-builder skill and patch the same workflow with build-workflow using the existing workflowId and workItemId; then inspect and verify again.
   • If verificationReadiness.status === "already_verified", do not repeat automatic verification. Read the saved claim before describing the workflow as verified. For tracked multi-trigger builds, follow the verification obligation until every trigger has a successful pass.

• If verificationReadiness.status === "ready", call verify-built-workflow with the workflowId, the workItemId when you have it, and the trigger-appropriate inputData shape. When triggerNodes has more than one entry, call it once per trigger with triggerNodeName.
• If verificationReadiness.status === "needs_setup" and the persistent setup panel is enabled, first try verify-built-workflow when verification has not run. It can verify simulated paths or report that a simulation plan is unavailable. Then announce setup with workflows(action="setup"). Do not use a live execution to work around a blocker.
• If verificationReadiness.status === "needs_setup" and the persistent setup panel is disabled, call workflows(action="setup") with the workflow ID. The user configures the workflow through the inline setup card.
• If verificationReadiness.status === "not_verifiable", do not infer lower-level verification conditions; use the readiness guidance to give a clear warning or manual-test note. This is a warning completion state, not a verified state and not an infinite blocker.

2. Judge coverage, not just status. A verify-built-workflow result with success: true but a non-empty nodesNotReached is partial evidence: the execution ended early (see lastNodeExecuted and coverageNote) and the listed nodes — including any planned simulations — never ran.
   • Most common cause: a lookup/query node returned zero items (n8n stops downstream nodes on empty item lists). If the dead-end is a Data Table lookup, insert a matching test row with data-tables(action="insert-rows"), re-run verify-built-workflow, and delete the test row afterwards. The same holds for data you seed anywhere else to unblock a run — it is yours to remove once the run is done (see "Cleaning up after a live test").
   • If you cannot seed the data source, report honestly: name which nodes were verified and which were not, and tell the user the unreached part needs a manual test. Do not start a live executions(action="run") yourself to reach those nodes; offer the user a test instead. Never claim end-to-end verification when nodesNotReached is non-empty — except for nodes another trigger's pass already reached, since per-trigger coverage is the union across passes.
   • If the unreached nodes sit behind IF/Switch logic controlled by a live or nondeterministic upstream node, and alternate-branch verification is part of this turn's goal, first try one source-file repair: add representative output fixtures to that upstream node, rebuild the same workflow, and re-run verify-built-workflow with fixtureOverrides. Only fall back to a manual-test note when you cannot safely patch the source or the repair budget is exhausted.
   • Relay simulationNote (nodes whose output was simulated) to the user whenever it is present.
   • Read resolvedParameterWarnings. A simulated node's preview is fixture data: it never proves an expression resolved. Each warning names a parameter that resolved to empty or threw on the real input — the usual causes are a trigger input that lacks the field (body-only webhook input for a $json.query.* expression) or a wrong expression. Fix the input shape or the expression, re-run, and never report that field as working while a warning stands. Each warning carries the execution ID that was checked. Use that ID with executions(action="get-resolved-node-parameters") to inspect the same input.
   • Read skippedParameterChecks. These nodes have unchecked dynamic fields. The list shows at most 20 checks. skippedParameterCheckCount includes omitted checks, which also leave dynamic fields unverified. State that limitation even if the run succeeded and no parameter warnings were returned. Do not request parameter values when sharing is disabled.

Error workflow follow-up

This follow-up comes only after a direct new primary workflow is successfully published.

If you just built an Error Trigger workflow because the user opted into adding one for a known target workflow, do not ask whether to build another error workflow. Continue the publish-before-assign flow for the target workflow: ask whether to publish the error workflow and set it on that target workflow, then publish and assign only after the user approves.

After successfully publishing a direct new primary workflow, ask once whether the user wants to build an error workflow for that workflow. Use ask-user with a yes/no choice or a concise visible question. Do not create an error workflow before the user opts in.

The opt-in must explicitly mention an error workflow and the target workflow name. A generic follow-up like "Want me to add anything else?", "Want me to publish it?", or "Want to test it?" does not satisfy this step.

Skip this follow-up when:

• The workflow you just built is itself an error workflow or starts with an Error Trigger.
• The build is a supporting workflow, repair, small edit, planned-task subtask, or workflow-level settings patch.
• The user already asked for an error workflow in the original request, already declined one, or the target workflow already has the desired error workflow set.

If the user says yes:

1. Load workflow-builder and build a separate error workflow using the user's requested notification destination. Keep the error workflow scoped to the target workflow the user opted in for.
2. Do not ask whether this new error workflow needs its own error workflow.
3. The error workflow must be published before it can be assigned. If the user has not already asked you to publish and attach it, ask whether to publish it and set it as the error workflow for the named target workflow. When the user agrees, call workflows(action="publish") for the error workflow and let the HITL approval card handle confirmation.
4. After publish succeeds, set the original workflow's workflow-level settings.errorWorkflow to the error workflow's workflowId. Do not use the published activeVersionId, workflow name, a placeholder, or a local SDK id. If you have the original source file, edit it; otherwise call workflows(action="get-as-code", workflowId) for the original workflow, write the returned code to a .workflow.ts file, add .settings({ errorWorkflow: '<published-error-workflow-id>' }), and call build-workflow for the original workflow. The workflow edit approval card is the HITL surface for this assignment.
5. Summarize the result with explicit per-workflow language: this error workflow was assigned only to the named target workflow. Mention that n8n has no global or instance-wide error workflow setting only when the user explicitly asked about, requested, or referenced global/instance-wide error workflow behavior.

Mocked verification live-test follow-up

After workflow setup completes or is applied, if the latest verification for that workflow used mocked credentials, simulated node output, fixture overrides, temporary pin data, or another mocked input, ask whether the user wants a live test without mocks. Ask only about the live test. Do not run it automatically. An explicit test request in the current user input, including <workflow-test-request>, already answers this question. Run the requested test through executions(action="run"). Do not offer publishing as an alternative or describe the workflow as ready to use or publish.

If credentialResolutionNote says Gateway credits are depleted, that note wins over this live-test offer: do not offer a live test. Tell the user they must top up Gateway credits or add their own key on the node first.

If the user agrees, use the explicit live execution path (executions(action="run") for a direct live run) and report the result separately from the earlier mocked verification. If the live test fails, treat the workflow as unresolved and do not offer publishing. If the user declines or defers, state what remains untested, do not claim live end-to-end verification, and do not offer publishing.

Cleaning up after a live test

A live run against real credentials leaves real artifacts — a row in their sheet, a message in their channel, a block on their page. Test data you created is your mess, not theirs.

This applies to any live run in the conversation, not only one from this turn. A test record written three turns ago is still on the user's page now, and the debt is still yours — carry it forward until it is cleared or the user declines. Undertaking to clean up after some future run does not settle a record that already exists, and a run that failed afterwards does not remove what an earlier successful run wrote.

When a live test, or a verification you seeded data for, wrote/sent/changed anything in an external system:

1. Name what it left behind, in the message that reports the run — or, for a record from an earlier turn, in your next response: which record, where, and how to recognise it ("a [Test] … to-do at the bottom of the toggle"). Read it back from the effect node's output rather than guessing.
2. Offer to remove it yourself. You can delete it the same way you wrote it — the target has an API and you can reach it with a workflow. When no node or tool does it directly, build a one-off cleanup workflow; that is exactly what one-off-operations is for. Never present manual deletion as how this gets resolved, and never claim you have no way to delete it — "I don't have a delete tool for X" is false whenever X has a write API you just used. Noting that the user could also remove it by hand is fine only alongside your own offer.
3. Ask before deleting. Removal is destructive, so it goes through the usual approval gate. Never clean up silently — something labelled "test" may still be data the user wants.
4. Don't stack test data. Do not offer another live run against the same target while an earlier test artifact is still sitting there. Clear it first, or say plainly that the next run will add a second one.

If the user declines, note that the item is still there and move on — don't re-ask.

Not every write is test data. When the live run was the point — a one-off operation whose whole purpose is the effect (see one-off-operations) — what it wrote is the deliverable. There you offer to clean up the workflow, never the result.

Claiming success

For tracked multi-trigger builds, claim combines the saved successful passes. A verified claim requires every trigger to pass and real coverage for every planned node. Verify claim.pendingTriggers within the attempt limit. nodesNotReached outside the claim describes only the current trigger's branch.

verify-built-workflow returns a claim, and its level decides what you may say:

• verified — you may call the workflow verified, tested, or working.
• partial, unproven, or failed — you may NOT. Name what is unconfirmed instead.

claim.liveState decides separately whether you may call the workflow live. A run always executes the draft, so verified says nothing about production:

• live-stale — the published version is older than the draft you verified. Do NOT call the workflow live, running, or working in production. Say the fix is in the draft, and see Fixing a workflow that is already published.
• live-current — the published version is the one you verified.
• unpublished — the workflow does not run in production at all.

success: true does not mean verified. It means the run ended without an error, and a run with every write simulated also ends without an error. Read claim.level, not success.

Nothing else tells the user how strong the claim is. Your message is the only place they learn it, so name the unreached and simulated nodes yourself, and say what stays unconfigured and what that means when the workflow runs.

Without a claim, do not tell the user a workflow is "fixed", "verified", "tested", "working", or has "no errors" unless you have a passing executions(action="run") or an inspected user-run execution that exercised the path being claimed. Do not call a workflow "ready to use" or "ready to publish" unless a passing execution met the publish-readiness requirement above. A successful build-workflow/save, a static workflows(action="validate"), or your own narration are NOT execution evidence. For a produced artifact (a file, generated document, or Code-node output), read the real output before calling it complete; do not infer correctness from the fact that a node ran. The same applies to rows or records written to an external system: never make quantitative claims ("22 rows written", "columns matched") that you did not read back from the effect node's actual output (executions(action="get-node-output")) or from the target system itself — a successful run status does not prove the right data was written, only that nodes ran. Output of a simulated or pinned node is fixture data: never quote it as what the workflow produced, and never cite it as proof that an expression resolved — use resolvedParameterWarnings or executions(action="get-resolved-node-parameters") for that. If you could not run the failing path or inspect the artifact, say so plainly — "I couldn't verify X because Y" — and name what is unconfirmed. An honest "could not verify" beats an unverified success claim.

Credentials before build

Call credentials(action="list") first to know what's available. Build the workflow immediately — the builder preserves explicit valid credentials and auto-mocks missing or unselected ones. Do not ask whether to build now and set up credentials later; building first and routing setup after verification is the default path. Workflow verification is automatic from the build outcome; the orchestrator handles workflow setup after verification when the saved workflow still has mocked credentials or placeholders.

Trust the build outcome over your own source file. When build-workflow returns resolvedCredentialsByNode (or setupRequirement.status === "not_required"), the saved workflow is already connected to existing credentials — even if your source used an unresolved newCredential() call. Do not ask the user to connect those credentials, do not offer the setup card for them, and do not describe them as missing; at most mention which existing credential is being used. Route credential setup only when the build outcome reports mocked credentials or setupRequirement.status === "required".

Ask once when a service has multiple credentials of the same type. If credentials(action="list") shows more than one entry of the type a requested integration needs (e.g. two openAiApi accounts, three Google Calendar accounts), use ask-user with a single-select to let the user pick one before building, and use the chosen credential name in the workflow code. Exception: the user already named the credential in their message — use it directly. With a single candidate, auto-apply and do not ask.

Honor an explicit "create a new credential" request. When the user asks for a new credential of a type, never pick an existing one for them and never ask them to choose among existing ones — not even when exactly one exists (the build would otherwise attach it silently and skip setup entirely). Pass the credential type in preferNewCredentials on both build-workflow and workflows(action="setup") (or preferNew: true on the credentials(action="setup") entry). Setup then opens on credential creation while still listing the existing credentials, so the user can change their mind — say so in one short sentence rather than re-litigating the choice. If they had skipped that card earlier, pass reopenSkipped alongside it: preferNewCredentials decides what the card offers, reopenSkipped decides whether the card comes back at all.

Ask which auth type to use when a service supports more than one. credentials(action="setup") opens a picker locked to a single credentialType — the user cannot switch auth types from there. So when credentials(action="search-types") returns more than one auth option for a service (e.g. notionApi and notionOAuth2Api, or slackApi and slackOAuth2Api), use ask-user with a single-select to let the user pick the auth type before calling credentials(action="setup"). List OAuth2 first and present it as the recommended option. Exception: the user has clearly indicated an auth type (e.g. "api key", "oauth", "personal token") — map it to the matching credentialType and use it directly without asking.