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 '[mutation]' to indicate it's a write operation, but lacks disclosure of side effects, reversibility, what happens if the tag doesn't exist, or why the tool accepts seemingly unrelated parameters like 'query' and 'limit'.

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 two-part structure (short phrase + detailed explanation) is efficient and front-loaded. However, given the tool has 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is arguably too minimal rather than appropriately concise.

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 mutation tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the purpose of optional parameters, the expected behavior on missing tags/customers, or the return value structure.

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, the baseline is met. However, the description does not clarify the semantics of the 7 optional parameters, several of which ('query', 'limit', 'primary_phone', 'secondary_phone') appear unrelated to the core tag removal operation and may confuse the agent.

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 ('Elimina'/removes) and clear resource ('etiqueta de un cliente'/customer tag). The '[mutation]' label and Spanish phrasing 'Quitar tag' clearly distinguishes this removal operation from siblings like 'add_customer_tag' and 'update_customer_tags'.

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 verb 'Elimina' provides implicit guidance that this is for deletion rather than addition (add_customer_tag) or modification (update_customer_tags). However, there is no explicit 'when to use' guidance, prerequisites, or mention of error cases (e.g., if the tag doesn't exist).

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