whatsapp_capabilities

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only query ('Mostra'), but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, requires no permissions, or is safe. The implied behavior is clear, but not fully transparent.

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 a single, brief sentence that perfectly captures the tool's function without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 has an output schema to document return values and no parameters, the description is complete enough. It succinctly explains what capabilities are shown, which is appropriate for a discovery tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline 4 is appropriate. Schema coverage is 100% (empty), and the description does not need to add parameter semantics since none exist.

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 that the tool shows supported paths, formats, and backends, using a specific verb ('Mostra') and resource ('caminhos, formatos e backends'). It distinguishes from siblings like search, send, or export tools by focusing on capabilities.

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 implies usage for discovering supported features before using other tools, but it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are mentioned.

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