WAzion MCP Server

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. The '[mutation]' tag indicates a write operation, and 'Cambia el orden de ejecucion' discloses the behavioral impact. However, it lacks details on atomicity, side effects on active workflows, or reversibility.

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 a single, highly efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the action. Every element serves a purpose, including the '[mutation]' qualifier which provides behavioral context without verbosity.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core purpose adequately. However, it should ideally clarify whether the operation replaces the entire ordering or allows partial updates, and what success indicates.

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 schema fully documents the 'order' parameter structure. The description does not add additional semantic meaning (e.g., constraints on priority values, partial vs. full replacement behavior), meriting the baseline score.

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 ('Reordenar', 'Cambia el orden') and clearly identifies the resource ('workflows de WhatsApp'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_whatsapp_workflow or update_whatsapp_workflow by explicitly targeting execution order changes.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to reorder vs. update workflow content) or prerequisites. It states what the tool does but not when an agent should select it.

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