WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsApp

Delete Group

wa_delete_group

Destructive

Delete a WhatsApp group: remove every other member and then leave. The account must be a group admin. WhatsApp has no true group-delete, so this empties the group and exits it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`group_jid`	Yes	the group (…@g.us) JID to delete, as returned by wa_list_groups
`account_id`	Yes	the account, as returned by wa_list_accounts

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	No	the rows of a list operation
`status`	Yes	ok (the operation succeeded) or refused (see refusal; for wa_update_group, applied lists the changes that took effect before it)
`applied`	No	wa_update_group only: the settings that were changed, in order — on a refusal, the ones that took effect before it
`refusal`	No	present only when status is refused
`summary`	No	a human-readable result
`group_jid`	No	the new group's JID (wa_create_group only) — use it as wa_send_message's 'to'
`invite_link`	No	the group's invite link (wa_create_group or wa_get_group_invite_link)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 22, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / applied

Added value: +{
+  "description": "wa_update_group only: the settings that were changed, in order — on a refusal, the ones that took effect before it",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": [
+    "null",
+    "array"
+  ]
+}

changedOutput schema / properties / status / description

Previous value: -"ok (the operation succeeded) or refused (nothing was done)"New value: +"ok (the operation succeeded) or refused (see refusal; for wa_update_group, applied lists the changes that took effect before it)"

First observedSep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description openly discloses the destructive behavior beyond the annotations: it removes every other member, leaves the group, and explains that WhatsApp has no true group-delete. This adds critical context about what actually happens, which the annotations (destructiveHint) only hint at. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the prerequisite and an explanatory note. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

For a destructive operation, the description fully explains the behavior, prerequisites, and rationale. The presence of an output schema covers return values. An agent has everything needed to decide when and how to invoke this tool correctly.

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%, with both parameters already well described in the input schema. The description does not provide additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Delete a WhatsApp group') and then clarifies the exact mechanism ('remove every other member and then leave'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like wa_leave_chat or wa_remove_participants by explaining the workaround behavior. The purpose is unmistakable.

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?

The description gives a clear prerequisite ('The account must be a group admin') but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives such as wa_leave_chat or wa_update_group. The usage context is implied through the explanation of the delete workaround, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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

All WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsApp tools Inspect

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

Need Help?