Skip to main content
Glama

Reply to a WhatsApp contact

reply

Responde a um numero especifico que mandou mensagem para o numero-ponte. Igual a send, mas "to" e OBRIGATORIO. Responder a quem te escreveu (reply-ratio alto) e mais seguro que cold outbound.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesDestino so com digitos, como texto ou numero (ex: 5511999998888).
messageYesTexto da resposta.
owner_phoneNoNumero do dono (so digitos, como texto ou numero). Passe para reativar a conta se a sessao MCP for nova (clientes stateless).

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; description adds context that replying is safer than cold outbound, but doesn't disclose potential failure modes (e.g., if the number hasn't messaged).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences that efficiently convey purpose, usage, and risk comparison without wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the core purpose and comparisons but omits any mention of the optional `owner_phone` parameter and its role in re-activating accounts, leaving a small gap for new users.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), and the description only reiterates that 'to' is mandatory, adding minimal new meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool replies to a specific number that messaged the bridge, and distinguishes it from the sibling tool `send` by noting 'to' is mandatory.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly recommends this tool over `send` for replies because it enforces the mandatory 'to' and is safer than cold outbound messaging.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: provisioning, verification, sending, replying, scheduling, cancellation, listing schedules, viewing status, and browsing messages. There is no ambiguity between them.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most names follow a verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., cancel_schedule, list_messages). A few are single verbs (provision, reply, schedule, send) or a noun (status), creating minor inconsistency but still understandable.

Tool Count5/5

9 tools is well-scoped for a WhatsApp messaging/scheduling service. Each tool addresses a distinct operation without being excessive or sparse.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle: account setup (provision, verify), messaging (send, reply), scheduling (schedule, list, cancel), status checking, and message history. No obvious gaps for the stated domain.

Resources