androidapi_send_whatsapp_bulk

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description adds value by confirming it sends messages. However, it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., costs, rate limits, external triggers), which would be useful given openWorldHint=true.

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 with two sentences covering the core action and supported features. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Send'. However, it could be better structured (e.g., bullet points) without sacrificing clarity.

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?

Despite having 12 parameters and no output schema, the description omits critical details such as how recipients and groups interact, what happens if both are empty, or the meaning of document-related parameters. It does not provide a complete picture for an AI agent to successfully invoke the 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 only 42%, so many parameters lack descriptions in the schema. The description mentions 'text, media, document' which maps to the type parameter, and alludes to spintax/shortcodes but does not explain the shortener or other parameters. It fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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 it sends a WhatsApp campaign to multiple recipients or contact groups, and specifies supported message types (text, media, document) and features (spintax, shortcodes). It distinguishes from the sibling 'send_whatsapp' tool by name, but does not explicitly contrast usage scenarios, so a slight deduction.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., send_whatsapp for single recipients, or send_sms_bulk). No prerequisites, constraints, or when-not-to-use information provided.

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