whatsapp_list_conversations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states 'recent conversations' without defining 'recent' (e.g., time-based or last N). The availability condition is mentioned, but no detail on error behavior if unmet. The tool is read-only but not declared.

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 description is two sentences long, concise, and front-loaded with the purpose. No unnecessary words.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should hint at the return format. It does not mention what data is returned for each conversation. For a simple list tool with one parameter, it is mostly adequate but lacks completeness on output.

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 the 'limit' parameter having a clear description, default, and range. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool lists recent WhatsApp conversations. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like whatsapp_get_conversation, which likely retrieves a specific conversation. The purpose is clear but lacking sibling distinction.

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 specifies a prerequisite: the webhook server must be running and have received messages. This provides clear context for when the tool is available. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions are given, but the condition is useful.

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