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 marks the operation as '[mutation]' and warns it's a 'acción peligrosa' requiring explicit confirmation. This provides critical safety context, though it could elaborate on side effects (e.g., 'sends messages to all contacts immediately').

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, followed by state constraints and safety warning. Minor redundancy with the prefix 'Iniciar campana de marketing —' which restates the tool name, but overall efficient structure.

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?

Adequate for tool selection: covers purpose, valid inputs, and safety requirements. However, lacks operational details (what happens after starting, credit consumption, irreversibility) and has no output schema or annotations to compensate.

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%, establishing baseline 3. The description reiterates the confirmation requirement but adds minimal semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides ('Pasar true para confirmar la ejecución de esta acción peligrosa').

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 provides specific verb ('Inicia el envio'), resource ('campana de marketing masivo'), and scope constraint ('Funciona con campanas en estado borrador o programadas'). This distinguishes it from siblings like resume_campaign (for paused) or create_campaign (for creation).

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?

Clearly states the confirmation requirement ('pasar confirm=true para ejecutar') and valid campaign states (draft/scheduled). However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives (e.g., 'use resume_campaign for paused campaigns').

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