WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It compensates by listing return fields (name, photo, business data), which is helpful since there's no output schema. However, it lacks details on error behavior (what happens if session_id is invalid), rate limits, or explicit read-only nature that would distinguish it from update_whatsapp_profile.

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?

Single sentence structure with em-dash separator is efficient. Information is front-loaded with the action verb. Minor deduction for the '[query]' tag at the end which appears to be metadata leakage rather than descriptive content.

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 simple single-parameter tool without output schema, the description adequately compensates by enumerating the returned profile fields (personal and business data). It covers the essential contract for a 'getter' tool, though error scenarios or business vs. personal account handling could be mentioned.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for session_id ('ID de la sesion WhatsApp conectada'). The description focuses on return values rather than parameters, which is appropriate given the complete schema coverage. Baseline score of 3 applies as the description adds no additional parameter context beyond the schema.

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 'Obtiene el perfil de WhatsApp' (retrieves WhatsApp profile) and lists specific returned fields (nombre, foto, estado/info, business data). It distinguishes from sibling update_whatsapp_profile by using 'Obtiene' versus 'update', though it could explicitly clarify the distinction from get_whatsapp_status or get_whatsapp_connection_status.

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 tool versus siblings like get_whatsapp_status or get_whatsapp_connection_status. No prerequisites mentioned (e.g., that the session must be connected/active), though 'sesion conectada' is mentioned as the target resource.

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