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 of behavioral disclosure. While [mutation] signals destructive behavior, it lacks essential safety context: whether deletion is permanent, if it requires confirmation, rate limits, or side effects. The description does not compensate for the missing annotations on a high-risk operation.

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 extremely concise with zero waste: a title phrase followed by a single explanatory sentence and a behavioral tag. Every word earns its place in the short string.

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 destructive bulk operation with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is dangerously incomplete. It omits safety warnings, the relationship between 'ids' and 'select_all' modes, and the irreversible nature of the operation that should accompany such tools.

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%, with all 6 parameters documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3 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 uses specific verbs ('Eliminar', 'Elimina') and resources ('bajas', 'registros de bajas de marketing masivo') to clearly identify the tool's function. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'remove_contacts_bulk' by specifying 'marketing masivo' and from 'get_unsubscribed_list' via the [mutation] tag, though it lacks explicit contrast with alternatives.

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 [mutation] tag provides minimal behavioral hinting, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'remove_contacts_bulk' or 'get_unsubscribed_list'. It fails to warn that all parameters are optional (0 required), which is critical for a bulk deletion tool.

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