whatsapp_get_message_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that live updates require a webhook, but does not specify response format, rate limits, or authentication needs. The behavioral information is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds a crucial usage note. No redundant words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely sufficient. It explains what it does and a key prerequisite. However, specifying the response shape would improve completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with one parameter (message_id) described as 'ID of the sent message'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'delivery/read status of a previously sent message'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like whatsapp_send_text (which sends messages) and whatsapp_mark_read (which modifies status).

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?

The description mentions 'Requires webhook server for live updates', which gives context on a prerequisite and implies this tool provides snapshot status. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives but provides clear guidance on a supporting requirement.

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