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. It correctly indicates a read-only operation via 'obtiene' and '[query]', and lists the specific configuration fields returned. However, it lacks details on error states (e.g., if no config is set), return format, or caching behavior.

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 efficiently communicates the purpose in a single sentence with a parenthetical field list. It is front-loaded with the action verb. Minor redundancy exists between the title fragment and description ('Obtener... — Obtiene...'), and the '[query]' tag is slightly awkward.

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?

Without an output schema, the description partially compensates by listing the specific configuration fields (auto-reply, unsubscribe, approval) that will be retrieved. However, it does not describe the return structure, data types, or behavior when configuration is unset.

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 tool has zero parameters (empty object schema), establishing the baseline score of 4. No parameter description is needed.

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 retrieves ('obtiene') the current mass marketing configuration and specifically lists the components included (auto-response, unsubscribe text, approval). The verb choice distinguishes it from the sibling 'save_mass_marketing_config'.

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?

The '[query]' tag and the verb 'obtiene' imply this is a read operation for checking current settings, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus the save counterpart or what prerequisites might exist.

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