WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It successfully indicates mutation nature via '[mutation]' tag, documents filename auto-generation logic ('se genera automaticamente desde el titulo'), and lists valid extensions. Missing: error behavior for duplicate filenames or return value structure.

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?

Efficiently structured with front-loaded action ('Crear archivo...'), followed by detailed explanation, use case enumeration, and mutation tag. Every sentence provides distinct value—no repetition of schema technicalities beyond the necessary filename/extension constraints.

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?

Appropriately complete for a 4-parameter creation tool lacking annotations. Covers mutation semantics, input validation (extensions), and fallback behavior (auto-generated filenames). Minor gap: does not describe return value or success confirmation method, though this is partially mitigated by the straightforward creation pattern.

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?

While schema has 100% coverage (baseline 3), the description adds semantic context by specifying business use cases (promotions, policies, FAQs) that help the agent understand what content belongs in the 'content' and 'description' parameters beyond their technical string definitions.

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 specific verb 'Crea' (Creates) and resource 'archivo en la base de conocimiento' (file in knowledge base). It clearly distinguishes from manual upload methods with 'sin necesidad de subir un archivo manualmente', establishing its unique value proposition among file management tools.

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?

Provides clear contextual guidance with concrete use cases ('promociones, politicas, instrucciones, FAQs'), indicating when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like 'update_knowledge_file' to clarify when to create versus modify existing files.

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