WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it includes '[mutation]' indicating a write operation, it fails to disclose whether deletions are permanent, if they affect contact existence globally or only list membership, rate limits, or how parameter combinations (select_all vs contact_ids) interact.

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?

Extremely concise with only two clauses plus a mutation tag. No redundant information, though the front-loading is adequate. The brevity is appropriate but leaves little room for the necessary behavioral context given the tool's destructive nature.

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 5-parameter destructive mutation tool with no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks critical safety context (irreversibility warnings), lacks explanation of the filtering logic between search/contact_ids/select_all parameters, and provides no insight into success/failure behavior for bulk operations.

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 100%, so the schema adequately documents each parameter. The description adds no additional semantic information (such as the mutually exclusive relationship between 'contact_ids' and 'select_all', or that 'exclude_ids' only applies when 'select_all' is true), but meets the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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 deletes multiple contacts from a marketing list ('Elimina múltiples contactos de una lista de marketing'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling 'remove_contact_from_list' (singular) via 'bulk'/'múltiples' and from 'delete_contact_list' by specifying it removes contacts FROM a list rather than deleting the list itself.

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 singular 'remove_contact_from_list', or when to use 'select_all' versus providing specific 'contact_ids'. The description lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or workflow guidance for this destructive operation.

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