Skip to main content
Glama

whatsmcp

by com.whatsmcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete WhatsApp Business Template

wa_delete_template
Destructive

Delete a WhatsApp Business message template from one of your Business (Cloud API) numbers — one language, or every language of the name when language is omitted. Meta blocks reusing a deleted template's name for a while.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesthe template name
languageNodelete only this language, e.g. pt_BR; omit to delete every language of the name
account_idYesthe Business (Cloud API) account that owns the template

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deletedNotrue when Meta deleted it
refusalNopresent only when the call was declined

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • 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"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, non-idempotent, non-read-only, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by disclosing a non-obvious real-world consequence: Meta blocks reusing a deleted template's name for a while, which an agent could not infer from the annotations. It stops short of stating permanence or auth requirements.

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?

One sentence, zero filler, with the resource scope front-loaded and the language-omission rule and Meta consequence trailing as supporting clauses. 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?

With annotations covering the destructive profile, a rich schema, and an output schema handling return values, the description supplies the one thing structured data can't: the name-reuse penalty and the all-languages default. Only missing element is whether the operation is reversible.

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%, so the schema already documents name, language, and account_id. The description restates the key semantic of omitting language (all languages of the name), which mirrors the schema rather than adding new information, so the 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?

States a specific verb (delete) and resource (WhatsApp Business message template), scoped to a Business (Cloud API) number. It is instantly distinguishable from sibling deletes such as wa_delete_message, wa_delete_group, and wa_delete_webhook. The language-scope clause further sharpens what exactly gets removed.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb and resource, and the language-omission rule effectively tells the agent when to pass or skip a parameter. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives (e.g. wa_list_templates to confirm existence first) and no stated prerequisites or permissions.

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

All whatsmcp 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