Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

whatsmcp

by com.whatsmcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Set Presence

wa_set_presence

Announce a typing state ("composing"/"paused") to a chat, or set one of your accounts online/offline ("available"/"unavailable"). Fire-and-forget: there is no delivery confirmation.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
chatNothe chat (a phone number or a group/channel JID) to announce a typing state to; required for composing/paused, ignored for available/unavailable
stateYescomposing (show "typing…"), paused (stop), available, or unavailable
account_idNothe account, as returned by wa_list_accounts; omit it when the workspace has only one account

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
statusYesok (queued to the bridge) or refused (nothing was sent)
refusalNopresent only when status is refused

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / refusal / properties / account_status / description
      Previous value: -"when the number is not working: its status — starting, not_running, whatsapp_down, suspended, pairing, unlinked or locked"New value: +"when the number is not working: its status — starting, not_running, whatsapp_down (telegram_down for a Telegram account), suspended, pairing, unlinked or locked"
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / account_id / description
      Previous value: -"the account, as returned by wa_list_accounts"New value: +"the account, as returned by wa_list_accounts; omit it when the workspace has only one account"
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "account_id",
-  "state"
-]New value: +[
+  "state"
+]
    • 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"
+  ]
+}
  3. 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"
+}
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false, and the description adds real context beyond them: 'fire-and-forget: there is no delivery confirmation,' which tells the agent not to retry or wait on a result. It does not mention rate limits or whether the recipient actually sees the state, so it falls short of fully rich behavioral disclosure.

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 tight sentences: the dual-mode capability first, then the fire-and-forget caveat. Every clause carries information an agent needs, with no repetition or filler.

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 an output schema present, return values needn't be described, and annotations cover the safety profile; the description covers both operational modes and the lack of delivery confirmation. Only minor gaps remain, such as how long a typing state persists and whether presence is visible to other participants.

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% — the chat, state, and account_id parameters are each documented, including the conditional requirement of chat for composing/paused. The description largely restates what the schema already says about the two state modes and adds no syntax, format, or account_id resolution details, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific verb (announce/set) and two distinct resources (typing state in a chat, account online status), and enumerates the concrete state values for each mode. No sibling tool in the list deals with presence, so an agent can unambiguously attribute this capability here; the only missing element for a 5 is an explicit statement about how it relates to siblings.

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?

It gives clear context for when each mode applies — typing announcements go to a chat, availability applies to your own account — and indirectly clarifies that no alternative tool exists for this. There is no explicit 'do not use this for X' guidance, but nothing about the intended usage is left ambiguous.

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