WAzion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description adds valuable context about what data is returned (file size and date). However, it lacks safety disclosures (read-only vs destructive), pagination behavior, or scope limitations that would help an agent understand operational constraints.

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 and front-loaded with the core action. However, the '[query]' bracket at the end appears to be extraneous markup or an editing remnant that detracts from clarity. The mix of Spanish description with English tool name is acceptable but inconsistent.

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 listing tool without output schema, the description adequately compensates by describing the returned data attributes (size, date). It could be improved by clarifying the relationship to the knowledge base system and mentioning default sorting or pagination limits.

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 coverage is 100%, so the `limit` parameter is fully self-documenting. The description does not add parameter-specific guidance, and the trailing '[query]' text appears to be an artifact or placeholder that does not correspond to any parameter in the schema, potentially causing confusion.

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 lists storage files uploaded to the knowledge base ('archivos subidos a la base de conocimiento') and specifies returned attributes (size, date). However, it does not clarify the relationship with sibling tool `list_knowledge_files`, which creates potential confusion about which tool to use.

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 alternatives like `list_knowledge_files` or `get_storage_status`. No prerequisites or conditions for use are mentioned.

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