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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description's real contribution is enumerating the possible returned states (authorized, notAuthorized, blocked, sleepMode), which is genuinely useful since there is no output schema, but it doesn't explain what those states mean or what an agent should do on each.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical state list is compact. It is slightly under-explained rather than bloated, but sizing is appropriate for a trivial read 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?

For a one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers the main unknown (the set of possible states). What's missing is only interpretive detail on those states, so it is nearly complete but not exhaustive.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('WhatsApp instance ID'), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds nothing about instance_id, which is the expected baseline case.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource: 'Get instance state', with the possible state values enumerated in parentheses. It doesn't distinguish itself from nearby siblings like whatsapp_get_instances or whatsapp_check_whatsapp, so an agent must infer which one returns instance status.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as whatsapp_check_whatsapp or whatsapp_get_instances, and no prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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