WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It correctly identifies the operation as '[mutation]' and discloses the business consequence (contact can receive automatic messages again). However, lacks operational details like error behavior when number isn't in opt-out, idempotency, or side effects.

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 zero waste. Uses em-dash structure to front-load the action ('Quitar contacto...') followed by effect explanation. The '[mutation]' tag is efficiently appended. Every word earns its place.

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 required string parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers the action, domain (WhatsApp opt-out), and business consequence. Missing only edge-case handling documentation, which is minor for this simple operation.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for the 'phone' parameter ('Numero de telefono a quitar de opt-out'). The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage and single simple parameter.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Quitar' (Remove) with clear resource 'contacto de opt-out WhatsApp', and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_whatsapp_optout by stating it 'Elimina un numero de la lista' (Removes a number from the list) to re-enable messaging.

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?

Implies usage context by explaining the outcome ('para que pueda recibir mensajes automaticos de nuevo'), indicating when to use it (to re-enable messaging). However, lacks explicit contrast with add_whatsapp_optout or guidance on when removal is appropriate vs other opt-out management tools.

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