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 it mentions retrieving 'latest' messages, it fails to specify default behavior when all 6 optional parameters are omitted, pagination limits, rate limits, or whether this operation is read-only.

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 brief (one line), but the trailing '[query]' appears to be a template artifact or unfinished thought that wastes space and creates ambiguity. The front-loaded structure is adequate but the artifact reduces clarity.

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?

For a tool with 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks explanation of default time ranges (24 hours implied by schema but not mentioned), pagination behavior, or return structure. With no annotations and high parameter complexity, more behavioral context is required.

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?

With 83% schema description coverage, the baseline is appropriately 3. The schema adequately documents 5 of 6 parameters (direction, phone, hours, session_id, days). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only vaguely hinting at query capability via the '[query]' fragment without explaining specific parameters or the undocumented 'limit' parameter.

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 WhatsApp message logs and displays recent sent/received messages ('Muestra los ultimos mensajes enviados y recibidos'). However, it fails to distinguish from siblings like 'get_whatsapp_conversation_history' or 'get_whatsapp_workflow_logs', and the trailing '[query]' fragment appears to be an incomplete placeholder or artifact.

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 such as 'get_whatsapp_conversation_history'. The '[query]' fragment hints at filtering capability but offers no explanation of when filtering is necessary or how to combine parameters effectively.

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