Skip to main content
Glama

WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsApp

List Channels

wa_list_channels
Read-only

List the channels one of your accounts follows, with each channel's JID, name and subscriber count.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
account_idYesthe account whose channels to list, as returned by wa_list_accounts

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsNothe rows of a list operation
statusYesok (the operation succeeded) or refused (see refusal; for wa_update_group, applied lists the changes that took effect before it)
appliedNowa_update_group only: the settings that were changed, in order — on a refusal, the ones that took effect before it
refusalNopresent only when status is refused
summaryNoa human-readable result
group_jidNothe new group's JID (wa_create_group only) — use it as wa_send_message's 'to'
invite_linkNothe group's invite link (wa_create_group or wa_get_group_invite_link)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • 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)"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the scoping detail that results are limited to channels the specified account follows, but it discloses no additional behaviors such as pagination, rate limits, or prerequisites beyond the schema's account_id reference.

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 entire description is one front-loaded sentence that states the operation, scope, and returned fields without filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter read-only list with an output schema, the description and schema provide enough to select and invoke the tool correctly. It is slightly less complete only because it does not explicitly route the agent away from other list tools or mention edge cases.

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% and account_id is already described as 'the account whose channels to list, as returned by wa_list_accounts.' The description adds no further parameter-level meaning beyond the general phrase 'one of your accounts,' so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), names the resource ('channels'), and defines the scope ('one of your accounts follows'). It also lists the returned fields, making it clearly distinguishable from sibling list tools like wa_list_contacts and wa_list_accounts.

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 indirectly indicates when to use it—when you need the channels a specific account follows—and the schema notes the account comes from wa_list_accounts. However, it gives no explicit comparison to sibling list tools or any 'use instead' guidance, so usage context is only implied.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources