Skip to main content
Glama

WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsApp

List Group Members

wa_list_group_members
Read-only

List a group's members. Each item is one participant with their JID, phone number (in 'name'), and an 'admin' flag.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
group_jidYesthe group (…@g.us) JID, as returned by wa_list_groups
account_idYesthe account, 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

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description correctly adds value by detailing the exact output fields (JID, phone number in 'name', 'admin' flag) without contradicting the read-only nature. It doesn't disclose potential limitations like pagination, but for a simple list operation this is sufficient.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose and immediately describe the output format. No redundant phrasing; every sentence earns its place.

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 simple list tool with an output schema available, the description covers the essential output structure and the operation's intent. There are no significant gaps for an agent to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are already documented in the schema (including the note that they come from wa_list_groups and wa_list_accounts). The description adds no new parameter information, so 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 ('List'), a clear resource ('a group's members'), and specifies the output items (participant with JID, phone number in 'name', and 'admin' flag). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like wa_list_groups (lists groups) and wa_list_contacts (lists contacts).

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 implies usage for retrieving members of a specific group but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. It relies on the schema's reference to wa_list_groups for context, but no direct guidance is provided.

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