WAzion MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. The '[mutation]' tag explicitly indicates a write operation, which is valuable. However, lacks disclosure on persistence (user-specific vs global), reversibility, required permissions, or immediate vs delayed effect.

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?

Single concise sentence with front-loaded purpose. No redundant information. The '[mutation]' tag is efficiently appended. Appropriate length for a single-parameter tool.

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 a simple 1-parameter mutation tool without output schema. Covers what changes (language) and where (dashboard/AI). Missing only minor details like scope persistence (per-user vs workspace-wide) or confirmation response behavior.

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 detailed enum mapping (es=Espanol, etc.), so baseline applies. Description references 'idioma' which aligns with the parameter but doesn't add syntax details beyond the comprehensive schema.

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 'Cambia' (changes) with specific resource 'idioma' (language) and clearly defines scope as 'dashboard y las respuestas de la IA'. Distinct from sibling tools like configure_ecommerce_locales or update_timezone by targeting UI/AI response language specifically.

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?

No explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives provided. However, the specificity of the scope (dashboard and AI responses vs. other localization settings) provides implied usage context. Lacks prerequisites or permission requirements.

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