WhatsApp Stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (totals, top lists, null name for groups) and suggesting whatsapp_get_contact for group lookups. No contradictions with annotations.

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 and well-structured, starting with a summary sentence followed by bullet points for return fields. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or wordiness.

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 there is no output schema, the description adequately explains the return values including totals, activity counts, top chats, and top contacts. It notes that group names may be null, providing useful context. Minor gap: not specifying the timeframe for 'this week' but overall complete for a simple stats tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description explicitly states 'No arguments needed,' which adds clarity. No additional parameter information is necessary.

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 provides an overview dashboard of WhatsApp activity including message totals, top chats, top contacts, and breakdowns. It uses specific verbs ('Overview dashboard') and resource ('WhatsApp activity'), and distinguishes from siblings like whatsapp_chat_summary and whatsapp_list_chats.

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 states 'No arguments needed,' making when to use clear. It provides context for the dashboard overview but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives among siblings. However, the zero-parameter nature makes usage straightforward.

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