whatsapp_configure

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Save WuzAPI credentials' without explaining side effects (e.g., overwrite, validation, persistence). The output schema exists but is not described, so the agent cannot know what to expect after calling. This insufficient transparency scores a 2.

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 short (two sentences plus two parameter lines) and front-loads the core purpose. It wastes no words, though the parameter format is somewhat informal. Still, it is efficient and easy to parse, earning a 4.

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?

Given the absence of annotations and the tool's role as a setup step, the description should cover what the output looks like, whether it is idempotent, and any prerequisites. It lacks these details, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates, but the description itself is incomplete. Score 2.

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 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It covers 'token' and 'admin_token' with brief explanations, but completely omits 'base_url' (a parameter with a default). The explanations are minimal and lack detail on format or constraints. This partial coverage scores a 2.

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 saves WuzAPI credentials and is for initial setup, distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform messaging or other operations. However, it could be more explicit about the scope, such as 'initializes the WhatsApp integration'. The verb 'save' is specific, but 'Run once to set up' adds necessary context, earning a 4.

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 advises 'Run once to set up', indicating one-time use, and mentions that admin_token is optional for admin tools. This provides some usage guidance but lacks explicit instructions on when not to use it or alternatives. Since siblings are all operational tools, the context implies this is the prerequisite, but no prerequisites are stated. Score 3.

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