mcp-whatsapp

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable context by specifying 'revoke (delete for everyone)', clarifying the scope of deletion beyond just removing it locally. It doesn't contradict annotations and provides behavioral insight not covered by structured fields.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the core action. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive nature (annotations cover safety), 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could benefit from mentioning potential side effects or confirmation of deletion, but it adequately covers the tool's purpose and behavior for a mutation 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description doesn't add parameter-specific details beyond what's in the schema, but it implies the need for message identification, aligning with the baseline score when schema coverage is high.

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 specific action ('revoke/delete for everyone') and resource ('a message'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'edit_message' or 'send_message'. It precisely communicates the tool's function beyond basic deletion by specifying 'for everyone'.

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 implies usage for message deletion but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'edit_message' or provide context about prerequisites. It lacks explicit guidance on when-not-to-use or named alternatives, though the action is clear.

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