WAzion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly identifies the operation as a [mutation], but lacks details about side effects (e.g., whether changes apply immediately, affect SEO/redirects, or require re-sync), validation rules, or error conditions.

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 reasonably concise with only minor redundancy between 'Configurar idiomas de la plataforma' and 'Configura como se manejan los idiomas'. The [mutation] tag is front-loaded and useful. Two sentences efficiently convey the purpose without excessive verbosity.

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 5-parameter configuration tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate. However, it could be improved by noting that all parameters are optional (allowing partial configuration updates) or mentioning Shopify-specific behavior implied by the parameter names.

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 has 100% description coverage with clear Spanish explanations for all 5 parameters. The description mentions 'idiomas y URLs' which maps to the parameters generally, but adds no additional semantic details (e.g., format requirements, examples) beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 configures how languages and URLs are handled ('Configura como se manejan los idiomas y URLs') for the e-commerce platform. It uses a specific verb (configura) and resource (idiomas/URLs), and the [mutation] tag distinguishes it from sibling read operations like get_ecommerce_sync_status.

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?

While the description implies usage context (e-commerce locale management), it lacks explicit guidelines on when to use this versus connect_ecommerce or prerequisites like requiring an active connection first. It does not mention that partial updates are possible since all parameters are optional.

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