List WhatsApp Chats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds value by noting that profile picture URLs may expire, describing the return structure including nullable fields, and specifying pagination behavior.

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 front-loaded with the purpose, uses bullet points for return fields, and is overall concise with no wasted words. Every sentence provides necessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers purpose, parameters, return structure, and usage guidance. It lacks an explicit output schema but compensates with a detailed textual description. The absence of error handling details is minor.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the output structure (id, name, picture, lastMessage, lastMessageAt) and how to use the returned chat ID in other tools. This contextualizes the parameters' purpose.

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 lists recent WhatsApp chats with last message preview and profile pictures, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like whatsapp_list_contacts (contacts) and whatsapp_read_messages (reading after getting ID).

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: 'Use the chat ID from results to read messages with whatsapp_read_messages.' It provides clear context for a typical workflow, though it doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives like whatsapp_search_messages.

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