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. It discloses the mutation nature via '[mutation]' tag and explains the personal vs Business account restrictions. However, it omits details about error behaviors, whether changes are immediate, or what the operation returns.

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 efficient two-sentence structure in Spanish. Front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by field categories, critical account-type constraints, and optional features. No redundant words; every clause provides necessary domain context.

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 8 parameters and complexity of WhatsApp Business vs Personal account types, the description adequately covers the essential domain constraints. The absence of an output schema is noted, but the description sufficiently explains the operational scope and account-type restrictions to enable correct invocation.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage (baseline 3), the description adds valuable semantic grouping by categorizing parameters into 'info/about' versus business data fields. It also emphasizes the cross-session application capability ('Opcionalmente aplica los cambios a otras sesiones'), reinforcing the purpose of the apply_to_sessions 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?

The description uses specific verbs ('Actualiza') and clearly identifies the resource ('perfil de WhatsApp'). It explicitly distinguishes between updating profile fields (info/about) versus business data, and differentiates from read operations like get_whatsapp_profile through both the verb choice and the '[mutation]' tag.

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?

It provides clear constraints on when specific parameters can be used (name changes only for personal accounts, not Business), which is critical domain knowledge. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus update_whatsapp_session or connect_whatsapp for profile setup.

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