Check WhatsApp connection

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context on top: the confidentiality guarantee ('Never displays credentials') and the shape of the state values (authorized, notAuthorized…), which help an agent interpret the response.

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 sentences, no filler, with the primary output content (provider + state) front-loaded before the credential caveat. Every clause carries information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must describe the return; it covers the two main pieces (provider and instance state) plus the credential exclusion. It stops short of fully enumerating the status object's fields, a minor gap for a simple zero-argument status probe.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is no parameter syntax to explain and the description correctly says nothing extraneous about inputs.

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?

States a specific verb ('Shows') and concrete resources: the configured provider (Green API instance and/or WhatsApp Cloud API) and the instance state (authorized, notAuthorized). This is plainly distinguishable from the messaging-oriented siblings like post_message or list_groups, though it never names an alternative to actively route the agent.

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 never says when to call this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist. An agent could infer it is a pre-flight connectivity/config check, but nothing in the text supplies that framing or any prerequisites.

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