WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Muestra' implies a read operation, the description lacks details about pagination behavior (despite limit/offset parameters), error handling when an agent is not found, or any rate limiting. It does not disclose what data is returned.

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 appropriately brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the trailing '[query]' appears to be an artifact or placeholder that doesn't add meaningful context, slightly detracting from an otherwise efficient structure.

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?

With 11 parameters including pagination and multiple filter options, and no output schema provided, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the filtering logic (e.g., whether filters are AND/OR combined), the maximum limit constraints, or the structure of returned task data.

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 Spanish descriptions for all 11 parameters, establishing a baseline of 3. The description text adds minimal value beyond the schema—it mentions 'agente especifico' but doesn't clarify the relationship between `agent_id` and `assigned_agent_id`, nor does it provide guidance on filtering syntax.

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 states it displays tasks assigned to a specific agent ('Muestra las tareas asignadas a un agente especifico'), which provides the core verb and resource. However, it fails to distinguish from siblings like `list_tasks` or `get_overdue_tasks`, and the presence of both `agent_id` (required) and `assigned_agent_id` (optional) in the schema creates ambiguity about which agent ID the description refers to.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that `list_tasks` might return all tasks while this filters by agent, or that `get_overdue_tasks` exists for specific overdue filtering. The '[query]' fragment suggests filtering capability but doesn't explain when to apply specific filters.

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