waha_get_group_participants

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, returns paginated results, includes participant roles/status, or has rate limits. For a WhatsApp group participants query with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and appropriately sized for a straightforward list operation.

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?

For a simple list tool with good schema coverage but no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks context about authentication requirements, return format, error conditions, or relationship to sibling tools. The agent would need to infer much from the tool name and schema alone.

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 already documents both parameters (groupId and session). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific context beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain what constitutes a valid group ID, how to obtain one, or when to use non-default sessions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the documentation work.

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 action ('List all participants') and resource ('in a group'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't specifically differentiate from sibling tools like 'waha_get_group' or 'waha_get_contact', but the verb+resource combination is unambiguous within the WhatsApp automation context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are related tools like 'waha_get_group' (which might return group metadata) and 'waha_get_contacts' (which might list all contacts), but the description doesn't help the agent choose between them or specify prerequisites.

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