n8n-validation-expert
Interpret validation errors and guide fixing them. Use when encountering validation errors, validation warnings, false positives, operator structure issues, or need help understanding validation results. Also use when asking about validation profiles, error types, or the validation loop process.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-14
- Stars
- ★ 3.3w
- Forks
- 3.9k
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- n8n-validation-expert
- description
- Interpret validation errors and guide fixing them. Use when encountering validation errors, validation warnings, false positives, operator structure issues, or need help understanding validation results. Also use when asking about validation profiles, error types, or the validation loop process.
02 资源文件 10
- 参考文档ERROR_CATALOG.md16.8 KB
- 参考文档FALSE_POSITIVES.md14.4 KB
- 参考文档README.md7.8 KB
- 参考文档references/android.md7.2 KB
- 参考文档references/browser.md3.3 KB
- 参考文档references/http.md2.3 KB
- 脚本scripts/android/relaunch.sh384 B
- 脚本scripts/android/tap.sh1.1 KB
- 脚本scripts/android/texts.sh1.1 KB
- 脚本scripts/android/wait-for.sh496 B
03 SKILL.md 正文
n8n Validation Expert
Expert guide for interpreting and fixing n8n validation errors.
Validation Philosophy
Validate early, validate often
Validation is typically iterative:
- Expect validation feedback loops
- Usually 2-3 validate → fix cycles
- Average: 23s thinking about errors, 58s fixing them
Key insight: Validation is an iterative process, not one-shot!
Error Severity Levels
1. Errors (Must Fix)
Blocks workflow execution - Must be resolved before activation
Types:
missing_required- Required field not providedinvalid_value- Value doesn't match allowed optionstype_mismatch- Wrong data type (string instead of number)invalid_reference- Referenced node doesn't existinvalid_expression- Expression syntax error
Example:
{
"type": "missing_required",
"property": "channel",
"message": "Channel name is required",
"fix": "Provide a channel name (lowercase, no spaces, 1-80 characters)"
}
2. Warnings (Should Fix)
Doesn't block execution - Workflow can be activated but may have issues
Types:
best_practice- Recommended but not requireddeprecated- Using old API/featureperformance- Potential performance issue
Example:
{
"type": "best_practice",
"property": "errorHandling",
"message": "Slack API can have rate limits",
"suggestion": "Add onError: 'continueRegularOutput' with retryOnFail"
}
3. Suggestions (Optional)
Nice to have - Improvements that could enhance workflow
Types:
optimization- Could be more efficientalternative- Better way to achieve same result
The Validation Loop
Pattern from Telemetry
7,841 occurrences of this pattern:
1. Configure node
↓
2. validate_node_operation (23 seconds thinking about errors)
↓
3. Read error messages carefully
↓
4. Fix errors
↓
5. validate_node_operation again (58 seconds fixing)
↓
6. Repeat until valid (usually 2-3 iterations)
Example
// Iteration 1
let config = {
resource: "channel",
operation: "create"
};
const result1 = validate_node_operation({
nodeType: "nodes-base.slack",
config,
profile: "runtime"
});
// → Error: Missing "name"
// ⏱️ 23 seconds thinking...
// Iteration 2
config.name = "general";
const result2 = validate_node_operation({
nodeType: "nodes-base.slack",
config,
profile: "runtime"
});
// → Error: Missing "text"
// ⏱️ 58 seconds fixing...
// Iteration 3
config.text = "Hello!";
const result3 = validate_node_operation({
nodeType: "nodes-base.slack",
config,
profile: "runtime"
});
// → Valid! ✅
This is normal! Don't be discouraged by multiple iterations.
Validation Profiles
Choose the right profile for your stage:
minimal
Use when: Quick checks during editing
Validates:
- Only required fields
- Basic structure
Pros: Fastest, most permissive Cons: May miss issues
runtime (RECOMMENDED)
Use when: Pre-deployment validation
Validates:
- Required fields
- Value types
- Allowed values
- Basic dependencies
Pros: Balanced, catches real errors Cons: Some edge cases missed
This is the recommended profile for most use cases
ai-friendly
Use when: AI-generated configurations
Validates:
- Same as runtime
- Reduces false positives
- More tolerant of minor issues
Pros: Less noisy for AI workflows Cons: May allow some questionable configs
strict
Use when: Production deployment, critical workflows
Validates:
- Everything
- Best practices
- Performance concerns
- Security issues
Pros: Maximum safety Cons: Many warnings, some false positives
Common Error Types
1. missing_required
What it means: A required field is not provided
How to fix:
- Use
get_node_essentialsto see required fields - Add the missing field to your configuration
- Provide an appropriate value
Example:
// Error
{
"type": "missing_required",
"property": "channel",
"message": "Channel name is required"
}
// Fix
config.channel = "#general";
2. invalid_value
What it means: Value doesn't match allowed options
How to fix:
- Check error message for allowed values
- Use
get_node_essentialsto see options - Update to a valid value
Example:
// Error
{
"type": "invalid_value",
"property": "operation",
"message": "Operation must be one of: post, update, delete",
"current": "send"
}
// Fix
config.operation = "post"; // Use valid operation
3. type_mismatch
What it means: Wrong data type for field
How to fix:
- Check expected type in error message
- Convert value to correct type
Example:
// Error
{
"type": "type_mismatch",
"property": "limit",
"message": "Expected number, got string",
"current": "100"
}
// Fix
config.limit = 100; // Number, not string
4. invalid_expression
What it means: Expression syntax error
How to fix:
- Use n8n Expression Syntax skill
- Check for missing
{{}}or typos - Verify node/field references
Example:
// Error
{
"type": "invalid_expression",
"property": "text",
"message": "Invalid expression: $json.name",
"current": "$json.name"
}
// Fix
config.text = "={{$json.name}}"; // Add {{}}
5. invalid_reference
What it means: Referenced node doesn't exist
How to fix:
- Check node name spelling
- Verify node exists in workflow
- Update reference to correct name
Example:
// Error
{
"type": "invalid_reference",
"property": "expression",
"message": "Node 'HTTP Requets' does not exist",
"current": "={{$node['HTTP Requets'].json.data}}"
}
// Fix - correct typo
config.expression = "={{$node['HTTP Request'].json.data}}";
Auto-Sanitization System
What It Does
Automatically fixes common operator structure issues on ANY workflow update
Runs when:
n8n_create_workflown8n_update_partial_workflow- Any workflow save operation
What It Fixes
1. Binary Operators (Two Values)
Operators: equals, notEquals, contains, notContains, greaterThan, lessThan, startsWith, endsWith
Fix: Removes singleValue property (binary operators compare two values)
Before:
{
"type": "boolean",
"operation": "equals",
"singleValue": true // ❌ Wrong!
}
After (automatic):
{
"type": "boolean",
"operation": "equals"
// singleValue removed ✅
}
2. Unary Operators (One Value)
Operators: isEmpty, isNotEmpty, true, false
Fix: Adds singleValue: true (unary operators check single value)
Before:
{
"type": "boolean",
"operation": "isEmpty"
// Missing singleValue ❌
}
After (automatic):
{
"type": "boolean",
"operation": "isEmpty",
"singleValue": true // ✅ Added
}
3. IF/Switch Metadata
Fix: Adds complete conditions.options metadata for IF v2.2+ and Switch v3.2+
What It CANNOT Fix
1. Broken Connections
References to non-existent nodes
Solution: Use cleanStaleConnections operation in n8n_update_partial_workflow
2. Branch Count Mismatches
3 Switch rules but only 2 output connections
Solution: Add missing connections or remove extra rules
3. Paradoxical Corrupt States
API returns corrupt data but rejects updates
Solution: May require manual database intervention
False Positives
What Are They?
Validation warnings that are technically "wrong" but acceptable in your use case
Common False Positives
1. "Missing error handling"
Warning: No error handling configured
When acceptable:
- Simple workflows where failures are obvious
- Testing/development workflows
- Non-critical notifications
When to fix: Production workflows handling important data
2. "No retry logic"
Warning: Node doesn't retry on failure
When acceptable:
- APIs with their own retry logic
- Idempotent operations
- Manual trigger workflows
When to fix: Flaky external services, production automation
3. "Missing rate limiting"
Warning: No rate limiting for API calls
When acceptable:
- Internal APIs with no limits
- Low-volume workflows
- APIs with server-side rate limiting
When to fix: Public APIs, high-volume workflows
4. "Unbounded query"
Warning: SELECT without LIMIT
When acceptable:
- Small known datasets
- Aggregation queries
- Development/testing
When to fix: Production queries on large tables
Reducing False Positives
Use ai-friendly profile:
validate_node_operation({
nodeType: "nodes-base.slack",
config: {...},
profile: "ai-friendly" // Fewer false positives
})
Validation Result Structure
Complete Response
{
"valid": false,
"errors": [
{
"type": "missing_required",
"property": "channel",
"message": "Channel name is required",
"fix": "Provide a channel name (lowercase, no spaces)"
}
],
"warnings": [
{
"type": "best_practice",
"property": "errorHandling",
"message": "Slack API can have rate limits",
"suggestion": "Add onError: 'continueRegularOutput'"
}
],
"suggestions": [
{
"type": "optimization",
"message": "Consider using batch operations for multiple messages"
}
],
"summary": {
"hasErrors": true,
"errorCount": 1,
"warningCount": 1,
"suggestionCount": 1
}
}
How to Read It
1. Check valid field
if (result.valid) {
// ✅ Configuration is valid
} else {
// ❌ Has errors - must fix before deployment
}
2. Fix errors first
result.errors.forEach(error => {
console.log(`Error in ${error.property}: ${error.message}`);
console.log(`Fix: ${error.fix}`);
});
3. Review warnings
result.warnings.forEach(warning => {
console.log(`Warning: ${warning.message}`);
console.log(`Suggestion: ${warning.suggestion}`);
// Decide if you need to address this
});
4. Consider suggestions
// Optional improvements
// Not required but may enhance workflow
Workflow Validation
validate_workflow (Structure)
Validates entire workflow, not just individual nodes
Checks:
- Node configurations - Each node valid
- Connections - No broken references
- Expressions - Syntax and references valid
- Flow - Logical workflow structure
Example:
validate_workflow({
workflow: {
nodes: [...],
connections: {...}
},
options: {
validateNodes: true,
validateConnections: true,
validateExpressions: true,
profile: "runtime"
}
})
Common Workflow Errors
1. Broken Connections
{
"error": "Connection from 'Transform' to 'NonExistent' - target node not found"
}
Fix: Remove stale connection or create missing node
2. Circular Dependencies
{
"error": "Circular dependency detected: Node A → Node B → Node A"
}
Fix: Restructure workflow to remove loop
3. Multiple Start Nodes
{
"warning": "Multiple trigger nodes found - only one will execute"
}
Fix: Remove extra triggers or split into separate workflows
4. Disconnected Nodes
{
"warning": "Node 'Transform' is not connected to workflow flow"
}
Fix: Connect node or remove if unused
Recovery Strategies
Strategy 1: Start Fresh
When: Configuration is severely broken
Steps:
- Note required fields from
get_node_essentials - Create minimal valid configuration
- Add features incrementally
- Validate after each addition
Strategy 2: Binary Search
When: Workflow validates but executes incorrectly
Steps:
- Remove half the nodes
- Validate and test
- If works: problem is in removed nodes
- If fails: problem is in remaining nodes
- Repeat until problem isolated
Strategy 3: Clean Stale Connections
When: "Node not found" errors
Steps:
n8n_update_partial_workflow({
id: "workflow-id",
operations: [{
type: "cleanStaleConnections"
}]
})
Strategy 4: Use Auto-fix
When: Operator structure errors
Steps:
n8n_autofix_workflow({
id: "workflow-id",
applyFixes: false // Preview first
})
// Review fixes, then apply
n8n_autofix_workflow({
id: "workflow-id",
applyFixes: true
})
Best Practices
✅ Do
- Validate after every significant change
- Read error messages completely
- Fix errors iteratively (one at a time)
- Use
runtimeprofile for pre-deployment - Check
validfield before assuming success - Trust auto-sanitization for operator issues
- Use
get_node_essentialswhen unclear about requirements - Document false positives you accept
❌ Don't
- Skip validation before activation
- Try to fix all errors at once
- Ignore error messages
- Use
strictprofile during development (too noisy) - Assume validation passed (always check result)
- Manually fix auto-sanitization issues
- Deploy with unresolved errors
- Ignore all warnings (some are important!)
Detailed Guides
For comprehensive error catalogs and false positive examples:
- ERROR_CATALOG.md - Complete list of error types with examples
- FALSE_POSITIVES.md - When warnings are acceptable
Summary
Key Points:
- Validation is iterative (avg 2-3 cycles, 23s + 58s)
- Errors must be fixed, warnings are optional
- Auto-sanitization fixes operator structures automatically
- Use runtime profile for balanced validation
- False positives exist - learn to recognize them
- Read error messages - they contain fix guidance
Validation Process:
- Validate → Read errors → Fix → Validate again
- Repeat until valid (usually 2-3 iterations)
- Review warnings and decide if acceptable
- Deploy with confidence
Related Skills:
- n8n MCP Tools Expert - Use validation tools correctly
- n8n Expression Syntax - Fix expression errors
- n8n Node Configuration - Understand required fields
04 同仓库更多 Skills
wealthville-pool-scoring
Score DeFi liquidity pools before providing liquidity. Returns a 0-100 pool score and an Enter/Hold/Exit/Reduce/Avoid verdict with calibrated confidence for ~68,800 Solana pools and 575 EVM pools, plus a public miss-inclusive track record. Use when asked whether a pool is worth LPing into, which pools look best right now, or how accurate the scores have actually been.
technical-debt-auditor
Scans a codebase and produces a quantified technical debt report with a prioritized remediation plan. Analyzes dead code, TODO/FIXME/HACK markers, dependency staleness, complexity hotspots, code duplication signals, test coverage gaps, unused exports, and outdated patterns. Use this skill when the user asks to audit their codebase for tech debt, wants a health check of their code quality, says things like "where should I focus refactoring", "find code smells", "audit my codebase", "what technical debt do we have", "prioritize cleanup work", or asks about code quality metrics. Also trigger when the user mentions "code rot", "legacy cleanup", "refactoring priorities", or wants to understand the overall health of a project before a major effort. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "technical debt" explicitly — any request to systematically assess code quality and identify improvement priorities belongs here.
readonly-sql-guard
Make an agent's database access provably read-only. Use when an agent runs caller-supplied SQL against a production/ERP/analytics database (a "query" MCP tool, text-to-SQL, an admin console), or when reviewing DB-access code for write/DDL/side-effect/transaction-escape risks. Checks what a statement CALLS, not just its shape.
web-artifacts-builder
Suite of tools for creating elaborate, multi-component claude.ai HTML artifacts using modern frontend web technologies (React, Tailwind CSS, shadcn/ui). Use for complex artifacts requiring state management, routing, or shadcn/ui components - not for simple single-file HTML/JSX artifacts.
webapp-testing
Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.
discernment-nudge
After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.