WhatsApp Business MCP Server

list_templates

Retrieve message templates from a WhatsApp Business Account to manage customer communication. Filter by approval status to organize templates for sending messages or reviewing submissions.

Instructions

List all message templates in the WhatsApp Business Account, optionally filtered by status.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No	Filter templates by approval status
`limit`	No	Max templates to return

Implementation Reference

src/whatsapp-client.ts:210-218 (handler)

The implementation of listTemplates which makes the API request to fetch WhatsApp templates.

async listTemplates(params?: { status?: string; limit?: number }) {
  const qs = new URLSearchParams();
  if (params?.status) qs.set("status", params.status);
  if (params?.limit) qs.set("limit", params.limit.toString());
  const query = qs.toString() ? `?${qs.toString()}` : "";
  return this.request(
    `/${this.config.businessAccountId}/message_templates${query}`
  );
}

src/index.ts:284-298 (registration)

The MCP tool registration for 'list_templates', which calls the whatsapp-client handler.

server.tool(
  "list_templates",
  "List all message templates in the WhatsApp Business Account, optionally filtered by status.",
  {
    status: z
      .enum(["APPROVED", "PENDING", "REJECTED"])
      .optional()
      .describe("Filter templates by approval status"),
    limit: z.number().optional().default(20).describe("Max templates to return"),
  },
  async ({ status, limit }) =>
    executeWithHooks("list_templates", { status, limit }, config, () =>
      wa.listTemplates({ status, limit })
    )
);

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Mar 22, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions listing and optional filtering, but fails to describe critical traits such as pagination behavior (implied by 'limit' parameter), rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it's a read-only operation. This leaves significant gaps for agent understanding.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all message templates') and adds optional functionality ('optionally filtered by status') without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not cover behavioral aspects like pagination, error handling, or response format, which are crucial for a list operation with filtering. The description should provide more context to compensate for missing structured data.

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 both parameters ('status' and 'limit') with descriptions and enums. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining parameter interactions or usage examples, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('message templates in the WhatsApp Business Account'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'get_usiness_profile' or 'get_phone_numbers', which might also list resources, so it misses full differentiation.

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?

The description implies usage by mentioning optional filtering by status, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_analytics' or 'send_template_message'. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts for selection.

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

Deploy Server