list_scheduled_postsRetrieve WhatsApp scheduled posts by status—scheduled, sent, failed, cancelled, or all—to track delivery and manage announcements.
List queued, sent, failed and cancelled scheduled posts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no pagination, ordering, result limits, or default-filter behavior, and its word "queued" does not match the schema's "scheduled" enum value, which mildly muddies rather than clarifies.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity shades into under-specification rather than tightness.
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?
For a filtering list tool with no output schema and a 0%-documented parameter, the description should cover default scope, ordering, and result shape. None of that is present, leaving the agent to guess what an unfiltered call returns.
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%, so the description must explain the sole status parameter. It names four states but never maps them to the parameter, never mentions the "all" enum option, and never states the default when status is omitted.
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 ("List") and resource ("scheduled posts") plus the status scope it covers. An agent can tell this is the enumeration tool, but it never contrasts itself with siblings like cancel_scheduled_post or run_due_posts, and it doesn't clarify how it relates to the other list_* tools.
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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no named alternatives. It does not say whether calling it without a filter returns everything or only upcoming posts, nor when an agent should prefer this over run_due_posts or cancel_scheduled_post.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.