waha_get_messages

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 'Get messages' implies a read operation, it doesn't specify important behavioral aspects like whether this requires authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond offset/limit parameters, error conditions, or what format the returned messages have. The mention of 'optional filters' is vague and doesn't explain filter behavior.

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 that states the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with good schema documentation and gets straight to the point with 'Get messages from a WhatsApp chat with optional filters'.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (message format, structure), doesn't mention authentication requirements despite operating on WhatsApp data, and provides minimal behavioral context. The schema does heavy lifting, but the description should compensate more for the lack of annotations and output schema.

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 all 6 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond what's in the schema - mentioning 'optional filters' vaguely references parameters like fromMe and downloadMedia but doesn't provide additional context about how they work together or their practical implications.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'messages from a WhatsApp chat', making the purpose understandable. It also mentions 'optional filters' which hints at capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'waha_get_chat' or 'waha_get_contacts', which prevents a perfect score.

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. With many sibling tools available (like waha_get_chat, waha_get_contacts, waha_list_chats), there's no indication of when this specific message retrieval tool is appropriate versus other data-fetching tools in the WhatsApp ecosystem.

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