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 includes the '[mutation]' tag indicating a write operation, and 'Elimina' indicates destructive behavior. However, it lacks details on reversibility, whether the contact is deleted from the system or merely removed from the list, or what return value to expect.

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 optimally concise: 'Eliminar contacto de lista — Elimina un contacto individual de una lista de marketing [mutation]'. It uses an em-dash to separate title and description, front-loads the action, and every word earns its place. No redundant or wasteful text.

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?

Given the low complexity (single parameter, simple deletion operation) and absence of output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context (mutation, individual scope, marketing list resource). While it could benefit from describing the return value or success confirmation, it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward deletion tool.

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 100% schema description coverage ('ID del contacto a eliminar'), the schema fully documents the single required parameter. The description mentions 'contacto individual' which aligns with the contact_id parameter, but does not add additional semantic context, format examples, or value ranges beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate for high schema coverage.

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 explicitly states 'Elimina un contacto individual de una lista de marketing' (Removes an individual contact from a marketing list), providing specific verb (elimina/removes), resource (contacto/contact), and scope (individual/individual). The '[mutation]' tag and emphasis on 'individual' effectively distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'remove_contacts_bulk' and 'delete_contact_list'.

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?

The description implies usage by emphasizing 'individual' (contacto individual), suggesting this is for single-contact removal versus bulk operations. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use guidance, when-not-to-use warnings, or named alternatives (e.g., it does not explicitly state 'use remove_contacts_bulk for multiple contacts').

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