Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Sautikit

by io.github.SautiKit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_whatsapp_call_permission

Read-only

Check whether a contact has granted permission for you to call them on WhatsApp. A contact with nothing on record comes back as "no_permission" rather than an error. Pass live=true to also check with Meta and refresh the stored value.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "connection_id": "<connection_id>",
      "wa_id": "<wa_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_whatsapp_call_permission"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
liveNoalso check with Meta and persist the refreshed status; a failed live check silently degrades to the stored value
wa_idYesthe contact's WhatsApp id (a phone number)
purposeNoRequired on tools that read data or reports; recommended on every tool. One sentence: what you are doing and why (for example "finding this caller's open ticket to answer them"). Building a report, dashboard, analytics or an export is a SautiDesk Pro feature done by the report tools, not by pulling records.
connection_idYesUUID of the WhatsApp connection the contact belongs to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: an absent record yields the status 'no_permission' instead of an error, and live=true reaches out to Meta to refresh the stored value. That gives the agent a clear picture of failure semantics and of the latency/side effect of live=true; only the fact that a failed live check silently degrades to the stored value is left to the schema.

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 short sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, the absent-record return behavior, and the live=true option. The purpose is front-loaded and there is no redundant or filler wording.

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?

For a simple read-only lookup with a fully described four-parameter schema, the description covers purpose, edge-case return value, and the one optional flag that changes behavior. Since there is no output schema, it could be slightly more complete by naming the other possible permission statuses an agent should expect, but nothing essential 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented. The description reinforces the meaning of live=true in plainer language ('also check with Meta and refresh the stored value') but adds no detail on wa_id, connection_id, or purpose beyond what the schema states, which is the expected baseline.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Check whether a contact has granted permission for you to call them on WhatsApp.' That is unambiguous about what the tool returns. It does not, however, name or differentiate itself from the closest sibling, request_whatsapp_call_permission, which an agent could plausibly confuse with it.

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 rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the pre-flight check before calling, and the note about 'no_permission' being returned rather than an error clarifies a common edge case. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no routing to request_whatsapp_call_permission when the answer is no.

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

All Sautikit 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