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

There is a clear annotation contradiction: the description describes deleting messages 'for everyone' and editing messages, which are destructive/mutating operations, while annotations declare destructiveHint=false. The description also does not explain what happens after forwarding, authenticity/account requirements, or retry/idempotency concerns.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The action list is compact and scannable, but it spends valuable space on delete and edit behaviors when the tool name and 'Flattened action: forward' indicate this tool is specifically for forwarding. A single focused forward-focused description would be clearer and more concise.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, this description still omits prerequisites, account semantics, valid chat JID formats, return behavior, failure modes, and how bulk execution behaves. Combined with the annotation contradiction, it does not provide enough reliable context for correct tool invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the action shorthand adds useful meaning for chat_jid, message_id, to, text, for_everyone default true, and message_ids bulk support. However, the account parameter is not explained, and it is unclear which action-specific parameters still apply after the 'Flattened action: forward' instruction.

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

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

The description contains a concrete forward action ('forward ... to another chat'), but it is buried inside a generic 'Manage a message you can act on' list that also describes delete and edit. The extra 'Flattened action: forward' note helps, but the overall purpose remains ambiguous and not clearly differentiated from sibling delete/edit tools.

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

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

It provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus whatsapp_send_text, whatsapp_message_delete, or whatsapp_message_edit. Instead, the description actually lists delete and edit as behaviors of this same tool, which increases confusion about which sibling to use and when.

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