whatsapp_export_conversation

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions 'rendered conversation' and 'when possible' for media/transcription, but fails to describe side effects, required permissions, scrolling behavior, or error handling. This is insufficient for a complex tool.

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 sentence, which is concise. However, it omits crucial details that would justify its brevity; for a tool with 24 parameters, more structure and explanation is needed.

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 (24 parameters, no annotations, no parameter descriptions), the one-sentence description is severely incomplete. It does not explain output schema, usage constraints, or parameter interactions, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 0%, yet the description adds no information about any of the 24 parameters. All parameters remain undocumented, forcing the agent to rely solely on parameter names, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 exports a WhatsApp Web conversation to JSON format with optional media/transcription. It uses a specific verb ('exporta') and resource ('conversa renderizada'), distinguishing it from other sibling tools like search or send.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives is provided. The description implies usage for exporting conversations, but lacks prerequisites or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer context.

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