waha_leave_group

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 'Leave' implies a mutating action, it doesn't specify whether this requires specific permissions, what happens to group history, whether the action is reversible, or if there are rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks important operational context.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the essential action and gets straight to the point without unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after leaving (success indicators, error conditions), doesn't mention authentication requirements, and provides no context about the broader WhatsApp group management ecosystem among the many sibling tools.

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) adequately. The description doesn't add any additional meaning about parameter usage, format expectations, or examples beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Leave') and resource ('a WhatsApp group'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate itself from sibling tools like 'waha_remove_group_participants' which also involves group departure, though from a different perspective (admin removal vs self-leaving).

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing to be a group member), consequences (e.g., whether you can rejoin), or comparison to similar tools like 'waha_remove_group_participants' which serves a different administrative function.

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