WasapFlow Bridge

Send a marketing template (Marketing Messages API)

bridge_send_marketing

Send an approved MARKETING template through Meta's Marketing Messages API (quality-based delivery, marketing metrics). Not onboarded yet? Meta falls back to Cloud API unless product_policy is STRICT. This sends a real message and Meta charges for it.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "waba_id": "<waba_id>",
      "to": "<to>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "language": "<language>"
    },
    "name": "bridge_send_marketing"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`to`	Yes	Recipient phone in international format without +, or a BSUID.
`name`	Yes	Marketing template name.
`waba_id`	Yes	WhatsApp Business Account ID registered to your partner account (see bridge_list_numbers).
`language`	Yes	Template language code, e.g. en_US, ms.
`components`	No	Optional Meta template components.
`product_policy`	No	Optional. STRICT = never fall back to Cloud API.
`idempotency_key`	No	Optional Idempotency-Key (1-255 chars). Reuse the same key when retrying the same message: a repeat with the same key and body within 24 hours returns the original response and does not send again.
`biz_opaque_callback_data`	No	Optional biz_opaque_callback_data: your own reference (order id, ticket id), max 512 chars. Meta returns it on every status webhook of this message as data.biz_opaque_callback_data.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedNov 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / biz_opaque_callback_data

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional biz_opaque_callback_data: your own reference (order id, ticket id), max 512 chars. Meta returns it on every status webhook of this message as data.biz_opaque_callback_data.",
+  "maxLength": 512,
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / idempotency_key

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional Idempotency-Key (1-255 chars). Reuse the same key when retrying the same message: a repeat with the same key and body within 24 hours returns the original response and does not send again.",
+  "maxLength": 255,
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedNov 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: this sends a live message, Meta charges for it, delivery is quality-based, and onboarding status changes which API path is used. The fallback/dispatch nuance is not derivable from the structured fields. It does not address retry semantics, but the schema already covers idempotency_key in depth.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and the platform. The 'quality-based delivery, marketing metrics' parenthetical is slightly vague but cheap. Minimal waste overall.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a mutating, chargeable send with no output schema, the description supplies the two things an agent most needs to know before calling: it is a real send and it costs money, plus the fallback caveat. The return shape is left to the API, which is acceptable here, though template approval prerequisites are only alluded to via 'approved'.

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 all eight parameters are already documented. The description's only parameter reference, product_policy STRICT, restates what the schema property description already says. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: send an approved MARKETING template via Meta's Marketing Messages API. The 'MARKETING' qualifier implicitly separates it from the sibling bridge_send_template, but the sibling is never named, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives one concrete conditional: if not onboarded, Meta falls back to Cloud API unless product_policy is STRICT. However it never says when to pick this over bridge_send_template or bridge_send_text, which is the main routing decision an agent faces.

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

All WasapFlow Bridge tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.