Doc Feedback: Contradictory information regarding Lifecycle Coupling of MCP Servers and API Proxies

Description:
There is a theoretical inconsistency in how the relationship between MCP Servers and API Proxies is described.

Location :
https://wso2.com/bijira/docs/mcp-servers/design-mcp-servers/#mcp-servers-for-existing-api-proxies

The Conflict:
The text states: "the MCP Server is associated with the API Proxy, their lifecycles are not tightly coupled."
The very next sentence states: "unpublishing or undeploying the API Proxy can disrupt the MCP Server created using it."

Technical Detail:
In systems architecture, if the functional availability of Component A (MCP Server) is dependent on the deployment state of Component B (API Proxy), they are tightly coupled. Describing them as "not tightly coupled" is technically misleading and could lead to accidental production outages during API maintenance.

Suggested Fix:
Clarify the architectural dependency. If the MCP Server acts as a proxy/wrapper for the API, it should be described as dependent or tightly coupled to the underlying API Proxy's lifecycle.

Start with the MCP Servers for Existing API Proxies section at the linked documentation URL and compare the two adjacent lifecycle statements. Clarify the dependency so the wording is technically consistent, then verify the rendered page communicates the API Proxy impact of unpublishing or undeploying it.