WAzion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral disclosure beyond the '[mutation]' hint. It doesn't specify side effects (notifications sent, calendar events created), idempotency, error conditions, or return values.

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?

Extremely concise single-line description with no wasted words. Front-loaded action verb. However, for 11 parameters with some anomalous fields, this brevity may be insufficient rather than optimally concise.

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?

Given 11 parameters (including suspicious fields like task_id and pagination controls), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain the return value, error scenarios, or clarify the parameter schema anomalies.

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 coverage is 91%, the description fails to resolve critical ambiguities: it doesn't distinguish between 'agent_id' and 'assigned_agent_id', nor explain why pagination parameters (limit, offset) and 'task_id' exist in a create operation. The mention of optional client/agent associations adds marginal value for 'phone' and 'assigned_agent_id'.

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 it creates a new task ('Crea una nueva tarea') and mentions optional associations with clients and agents. The '[mutation]' tag helps distinguish it from read-only siblings like list_tasks. However, it lacks domain-specific context defining what a 'task' represents in this CRM system.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this versus update_task, nor prerequisites for valid agent_id/phone values. The description mentions optional associations but doesn't clarify when these should be populated versus left empty.

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