whatsapp_confirm_send_message

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

The description discloses one behavioral trait: it does not dispatch without verified Web/UI backend. However, it does not explain other behaviors such as error handling, side effects, or permission requirements. Since no annotations are provided, this partial disclosure is mediocre.

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 concise at two sentences, but it is overly brief, sacrificing necessary detail. It could structure the information better by separating purpose from constraints.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, output schema exists but undocumented), the description is insufficient. It provides only a basic purpose and one constraint, leaving many aspects (parameter semantics, return value, prerequisites) unexplained.

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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain key parameters like 'token', 'confirmation_text', and 'dispatch'. It fails to do so, leaving the agent to guess their roles.

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's action: 'confirma uma mensagem preparada' (confirms a prepared message). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'whatsapp_prepare_send_message' by specifying the confirmation step. The second sentence adds a constraint but does not detract from purpose clarity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'whatsapp_prepare_send_message' or 'whatsapp_probe_reply_to_message'. The warning about not dispatching without verified backend is a condition, not a usage comparison.

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