Skip to main content
Glama

Wassenger

by com.wassenger.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

manage_whatsapp_chat

Change a WhatsApp chat in the team inbox without sending anything to the customer: hand it to a teammate or department, add or remove labels, resolve or reopen it, leave an internal note, or mark it read or unread. The customer sees none of it. Your team sees the change, and your account's chat webhooks are notified.

Available actions:

  • assign: give the chat to agentId, agentEmail or departmentId (departments need a plan that includes them). A pending chat becomes active.

  • unassign: take the chat off its agent and department. It goes back to pending.

  • add_labels / remove_labels: the labels must already exist on the number, create them first with manage_whatsapp_labels. The chat keeps any label you do not mention.

  • resolve: close the conversation.

  • reopen: back to active if someone owns the chat, pending otherwise.

  • add_note: private note only your team can see (2 to 6000 characters). authorId writes it as that teammate.

  • mark_read / mark_unread: marking a resolved chat as unread reopens it.

To write to the customer, use send_whatsapp_message instead.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatYesThe chat: a phone number in international format, or its WhatsApp chat ID as returned by get_whatsapp_chats
noteNoInternal note text, WhatsApp formatting allowed (for add_note)
actionYesWhat to change on the chat
deviceYesWhatsApp number (device) ID the chat belongs to
labelsNoLabel names (for add_labels and remove_labels)
agentIdNoTeammate user ID to assign the chat to (for assign)
authorIdNoTeammate user ID the note is written as. Defaults to the API key owner (for add_note)
agentEmailNoTeammate email to assign the chat to, instead of agentId (for assign)
departmentIdNoDepartment ID to assign the chat to (for assign). Look it up with manage_whatsapp_departments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

No schema history has been recorded yet.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: it states nothing reaches the customer, the team sees the change, chat webhooks fire, and it documents state transitions (pending→active on assign, back to pending on unassign, reopen→active or pending depending on ownership).

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?

The safety-relevant scope ('customer sees none of it') is front-loaded, followed by a scannable action list where every bullet adds a distinct rule. No filler sentences.

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?

Nine parameters and no annotations or output schema, yet the description covers side effects, visibility, state transitions, cross-tool prerequisites, and the note length bound. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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; the description goes further by mapping parameters to actions (agentId/agentEmail/departmentId for assign, labels for add/remove, authorId for add_note) and adds a constraint not in the schema — departments require a plan that includes them.

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?

Opens with a concrete verb and resource ('Change a WhatsApp chat in the team inbox') and immediately scopes it as internal-only, then enumerates the nine actions it covers. An agent can distinguish it from send_whatsapp_message and the read-side get/search siblings 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 Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes writing to the customer elsewhere ('use send_whatsapp_message instead') and routes label creation to manage_whatsapp_labels. Per-action notes add conditions ('departments need a plan that includes them', unread-on-resolved reopens), so when-to-use and when-not-to-use are both covered.

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

All Wassenger 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