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. It implies a read-only operation through the verb 'Obtener' but does not explicitly state safety characteristics, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what data structure 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 relatively short but inefficiently structured with redundant phrasing ('Obtener configuracion... — Obtiene la configuracion...'). The '[query]' tag appears to be metadata leakage or noise that doesn't serve the agent. It is front-loaded with the action, but the repetition reduces quality.

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 this is a zero-parameter configuration getter, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema provided, the description misses the opportunity to describe what configuration fields or structure the agent should expect in the response.

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 zero parameters, which establishes a baseline score of 4 per the evaluation guidelines. The description correctly does not mention any parameters, as none exist.

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 identifies the action (Obtener/Obtiene = Get) and the specific resource (Smart Follow-up configuration), distinguishing it from sibling tools like save_smart_followup_config, get_smart_followup_logs, and trigger_smart_followup. However, the phrasing mixes infinitive and indicative moods and includes the unnecessary '[query]' tag, slightly reducing clarity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like save_smart_followup_config or preview_smart_followup. While the name implies read-only access to settings, the description lacks 'when to use' or 'when not to use' statements.

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