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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses irreversibility (deletion), the functional consequence (auto-replies stop), and the recovery cost (a new QR scan is required). It stops short of stating permission/ownership requirements or what the response returns, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler; the destructive action and its consequences come first, with the precondition second. Every clause carries actionable information.

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 an irreversible mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the critical safety narrative — permanence, downstream effect, and the required preview/approval sequence. The only meaningful omission is how to obtain a valid account_id.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single parameter account_id is never mentioned in the description, so an agent gets no hint about where the identifier comes from (presumably list_whatsapp_accounts) or its format. 'The WhatsApp account' only loosely implies an identifier is needed, which does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Disconnect and delete the WhatsApp account') plus the consequence, which unambiguously separates it from connect_whatsapp_account and list_whatsapp_accounts. The parenthetical 'irreversible' in the title is reinforced by 'delete' in the description body.

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?

Explicitly names the prerequisite sibling (preview_disconnect_whatsapp_account) and the human gate ('user approval'), telling the agent exactly what must happen before invocation. There is no ambiguity about when this tool is appropriate.

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