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 fails to disclose what specific details are returned (template content, variables, approval status), whether the operation is safe/idempotent, or what happens if the ID doesn't exist.

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, but contains the placeholder artifact '[query]' at the end which appears to be template leakage or an editing error, reducing 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 single-parameter retrieval tool without output schema, the description minimally suffices. However, it could improve by indicating what template details (headers, body, variables) are included 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 100% description coverage ('ID de la plantilla'), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantic context about the ID parameter format or examples, but doesn't need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 uses a specific verb ('Obtiene') and resource ('plantilla de mensaje'), and the word 'especifica' helps distinguish this single-item retrieval from the sibling list_whatsapp_templates. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with the list operation or clarify that this requires a specific ID.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (like list_whatsapp_templates), no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an ID from a previous list call), and no error handling context.

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