WhatsMCP: MCP for WhatsApp

Update Group

wa_update_group

Change a WhatsApp group's settings: its name, its description, whether only admins may change settings (locked), and whether only admins may post (announce). Pass only the fields to change; several can change in one call. If the group restricts settings to admins, the account must be one. WhatsApp applies each change separately, so on a refusal 'applied' lists the changes that took effect before it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	a new group name (max 25 characters)
`locked`	No	true lets only admins change the name, description and photo; false lets every member
`announce`	No	true lets only admins post (an announcement group); false lets every member post
`group_jid`	Yes	the group (…@g.us) JID, as returned by wa_list_groups
`account_id`	Yes	the account, as returned by wa_list_accounts
`description`	No	a new description; an empty string clears it

Output 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.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 26, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / refusal / properties / candidates

Added value: +{
+  "description": "on an account_ambiguous refusal: the accounts to choose from — retry with one of these as account_id",
+  "items": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "account_id": {
+        "description": "the id to retry with as account_id",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "name": {
+        "description": "the account's WhatsApp display name",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "phone": {
+        "description": "the account's phone number, E.164",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "status": {
+        "description": "whether the number works right now — live, connecting, or why not, as wa_list_accounts reports it",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "account_id"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": [
+    "null",
+    "array"
+  ]
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 11, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / refusal / properties / account_status

Added value: +{
+  "description": "when the number is not working: its status — starting, not_running, whatsapp_down, suspended, pairing, unlinked or locked",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / refusal / properties / account_status_reason

Added value: +{
+  "description": "the detail of account_status, e.g. no_egress, stopped, no_plan",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / refusal / properties / since

Added value: +{
+  "description": "when the number stopped working, RFC3339, when known",
+  "type": "string"
+}

AddedSep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing that changes are applied individually and that a refusal returns an 'applied' list of the changes that took effect before it — a failure-mode detail an agent cannot infer from readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint. It also states the admin-permission prerequisite, which no annotation conveys.

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?

Three tight sentences: what it changes, how to call it, and what happens on refusal. The failure-mode caveat is placed last where it belongs, and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape needs no explanation, yet the description still explains the one return field that matters operationally ('applied'). Combined with the permission prerequisite and partial-apply semantics, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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, but the description adds real semantics the per-field schemas don't state: that omitted fields are left untouched and multiple fields can be changed atomically-ish in one call. It also implicitly clarifies that the nullable boolean fields should be omitted, not nulled, when unchanged.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a WhatsApp group's settings') and enumerates the exact fields it touches: name, description, locked, announce. This clearly separates it from wa_create_group, wa_delete_group, and wa_update_participants, which handle lifecycle or membership rather than group settings.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete operational guidance: 'Pass only the fields to change; several can change in one call,' plus the prerequisite that the account must be an admin if the group restricts settings. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives (e.g. wa_update_participants for membership), but the scope boundary is clear enough to choose correctly.

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?