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 mentions 'recent executions' implying time-based filtering, but lacks disclosure on rate limits, pagination behavior, return format, or whether hours/days parameters are mutually exclusive or additive. No mention of what happens if session_id is omitted (all sessions vs error).

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 sentence plus prefix), but the 'Logs de workflows —' prefix is somewhat redundant with the tool name. The '[query]' suffix appears to be noise or a template artifact that wasn't removed, detracting from 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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the time-based filtering logic (hours vs days conflict resolution) or the purpose of session_id filtering. For a query tool with multiple optional time filters, this lack of behavioral context creates ambiguity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 parameters documented), establishing baseline 3. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance (e.g., no explanation of the relationship between hours/days, or that session_id filters to a specific WhatsApp session). The '[query]' text doesn't clarify parameter usage.

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 states it displays recent executions of automatic WhatsApp workflows (specific verb + resource), but it fails to distinguish from sibling tool 'get_whatsapp_workflow_logs'. The trailing '[query]' artifact creates confusion and appears to be a formatting error or placeholder that doesn't correspond to any parameter.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus the nearly identical sibling 'get_whatsapp_workflow_logs' or 'get_whatsapp_workflow_activity'. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., session_id requirements) or when to prefer 'hours' vs 'days' parameters.

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