WAzion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It includes the '[mutation]' tag indicating a write operation and specifies the domain (mass marketing), but fails to disclose idempotency, side effects, whether the change is immediate, or what validation occurs.

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 efficiently structured with a short action phrase, a clarifying sentence, and the mutation tag. No words are wasted; every element contributes to understanding the tool's scope.

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 tool without output schema, the description adequately covers the core functionality. However, given this is a destructive mutation (removing a blocking restriction), it should mention whether the operation is reversible or immediate to be fully complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage ('Numero de telefono a desbloquear'), so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add additional parameter context such as expected formats (E.164 vs local), validation rules, or examples beyond what the schema provides.

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 the specific action (Quitar/Desbloquea - Remove/Unblock), the resource (numero de telefono - phone number), and the target (lista negra de marketing masivo - mass marketing blacklist). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'add_to_blacklist' by using inverse verbs and from 'bulk_add_to_blacklist' via the singular form in the tool name.

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?

While the description implies this is for unblocking numbers previously added to the blacklist, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'add_to_blacklist' or the bulk variant. It doesn't specify prerequisites (e.g., whether the number must already be blacklisted) or error conditions.

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