Botsify

Create WhatsApp template

create-whatsapp-template

Create a WhatsApp or SMS media template via POST /v1/media-block/create. Set type to sms for SMS templates.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Template name
`text`	Yes	Template body text
`type`	No	Leave empty for WhatsApp. Set sms for SMS templates.
`extra`	No	Additional fields from the Postman request body
`buttons`	No	Button objects for CTA, URL, or postback
`language`	No	Template language code such as en
`template_specs`	No	Category, header, buttons, and other template specs

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	JSON or plain text body returned by the Botsify HTTP API

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey non-read-only, non-destructive behavior. The description adds endpoint context and the SMS type nuance, but lacks deeper behavioral details like authorization requirements or idempotency implications.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundant wording.

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?

Given 7 parameters including nested objects and an output schema, the description is adequate but terse. It covers the key type distinction but offers little guidance on optional fields or template creation flow.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented. The description reinforces the critical 'type' parameter ('Set type to sms') but does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('WhatsApp or SMS media template') with an explicit endpoint, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list-whatsapp-templates or send-whatsapp-broadcast.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly implies usage for creating WhatsApp or SMS templates and highlights the SMS type switch, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative creation or template-related tools.

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

All Botsify tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

Several tools have overlapping purposes, such as send-converse-message, send-inbox-message, send-user-message, and stream-user-message, which all deliver messages but with subtle differences. Similarly, list-bot-messenger-users and list-messenger-users both fetch messenger users, and start-builder-chat, clear-builder-conversation, and store-builder-response all manage builder chat state. Descriptions help, but the boundaries are still confusing.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names consistently use hyphenated lowercase verb-noun format, but the verbs and nouns vary significantly in specificity. For example, 'get-query-response' vs 'query-mcp-agent' vs 'stream-user-message' all imply querying but with different styles. The pattern is readable but not highly predictable, with some names like 'change-user-activation' and 'patch-instruction-section' deviating from the simple verb_object structure.

Tool Count2/5

With 44 tools, this server feels overloaded. The breadth covers bots, messaging, templates, whitelabel, and versions, but many tools could be consolidated (e.g., multiple message-sending variants). The count exceeds the 25-tool threshold for 'too many', making it difficult for agents to select the right tool without extensive context.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the main lifecycle: agent creation, versioning, deployment, deletion, messaging, conversation history, user management, template management, and whitelabel operations. Minor gaps exist, such as missing delete for WhatsApp templates or update operations for user attributes, but these are workable edge cases. Core workflows are well supported.

Resources

Need Help?