Skip to main content
Glama

Local MCP

by com.local-mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

WhatsApp Send Message

whatsapp_send_message
Destructive

Sends a text message to a WhatsApp chat. The chat_id MUST come from a previous whatsapp_list_chats call — never fabricate IDs. This is a write operation: the first call (confirm=false) returns a preview without sending; set confirm=true to actually send.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYesPlain-text message body
accountNoWhich linked WhatsApp account to use: its label or id from whatsapp_list_accounts. Leave it out to use the default account.
chat_idYesChat ID from whatsapp_list_chats
confirmNoMust be true to actually send. Without it, returns a preview.
rememberNoWith confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so ("don't ask again"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / remember
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "With confirm: true, also stop asking for this kind of action from now on. Only when the person said so (\"don't ask again\"). The person can revoke it in LMCP or with set_always_allowed.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / account
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Which linked WhatsApp account to use: its label or id from whatsapp_list_accounts. Leave it out to use the default account.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added
  4. Removed
  5. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true but say nothing about a two-phase send. The description discloses that the first call with confirm=false only returns a preview, that confirm=true actually sends, and that chat IDs may not be invented — behaviorally essential context an agent would otherwise get wrong. It is fully consistent with the destructive annotation.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the ID constraint, then the confirm flow. No filler; every sentence carries information an agent needs.

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

Completeness5/5

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

A write tool with an output schema present, so return values need not be explained. Purpose, ID provenance, and the confirm/preview protocol are all covered, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it correctly unaddressed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real value beyond the schema by constraining chat_id provenance ('must come from whatsapp_list_chats — never fabricate') and reinforcing the confirm semantics. It does not mention the account or remember parameters, but those are well documented in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Sends a text message to a WhatsApp chat'), and the word 'text' implicitly separates it from whatsapp_send_file and whatsapp_send_poll in the sibling list. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear precondition: chat_id MUST come from a previous whatsapp_list_chats call, never fabricated, and explains the confirm=false preview vs confirm=true send flow. It does not explicitly say when to prefer it over siblings like whatsapp_send_file or telegram_send_message, but the 'text message' scope makes the boundary reasonably clear.

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

All Local MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources