whatsmcp

Unpair Account

wa_unpair_account

Destructive

Disconnect a WhatsApp account from this service. The account stops sending and receiving immediately. Message history is kept. Re-connecting requires pairing the phone again, so ask the user before calling this.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`account_id`	Yes	the account to disconnect, from wa_list_accounts

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	Yes	what happened, and what was kept
`state`	Yes	logged_out once the account has been disconnected
`refusal`	No	present only when the request was declined
`account_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 14, 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"
+}

First observedSep 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the immediate effect on sending/receiving, that message history is preserved, and that re-connection requires re-pairing the phone. This is exactly the extra context an agent needs for a destructive operation.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying distinct information (effect, timing, history retention, recovery cost, caution), with the destructive action front-loaded. No filler.

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 values need no explanation, and the description covers the safety-relevant behavior for a one-parameter destructive tool. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

Only one parameter and the schema already documents it fully (100% coverage), including its provenance from wa_list_accounts. The description adds no further parameter detail, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Disconnect a WhatsApp account from this service') and its effect, cleanly distinguishing it from the sibling wa_pair_account via the re-pairing note. An agent can tell immediately what this does.

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 a clear precondition and caution ('ask the user before calling this') and frames the re-connection cost that motivates care. It stops short of explicitly naming when-not to use it or pointing to an alternative tool, but the context is unambiguous.

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

All whatsmcp 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?