Send WhatsApp Message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source. It discloses the auto-resolution behavior and optional media attachment. However, it does not mention prerequisites like needing a connected WhatsApp channel, fallback behavior if no channel exists, or error handling. This leaves important behavioral aspects unclear.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the purpose and efficiently conveys key details.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters and no output schema. The description covers sending, channel resolution, and optional media. However, it omits information about return values, success/failure indicators, error scenarios (e.g., no channel available), and any limitations like message size. These gaps lower the completeness score.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the auto-resolution logic for channelId and clarifies that mediaUrl is for optional media attachment. This functional context beyond parameter names justifies a score of 4.

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 sends WhatsApp messages to a phone number or group. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('Send a WhatsApp message') and distinguishes from sibling tools like neuron_send_message or neuron_send_broadcast by explicitly mentioning WhatsApp and the auto-resolution mechanism.

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 explains when to use the tool (sending a WhatsApp message) and details the auto-resolution logic (org default > first connected channel). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the context of sending makes the usage clear.

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