whatsapp_create_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear full behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any behavioral traits such as what happens if participants are invalid, whether the creator is automatically added, rate limits, authentication requirements, or irreversible effects. The description is too brief to inform the agent about side effects or constraints.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no superfluous words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second enumerates parameters. Every sentence is efficient and front-loaded.

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 an output schema (not shown) but no return value description. Given its complexity as a creation tool, it lacks context about prerequisites (e.g., must be connected via whatsapp_connect), error handling (e.g., invalid numbers), or behavioral nuances. The description is too sparse to fully inform the agent.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides minimal but useful semantics: 'name: group name' and 'participants: list of phone numbers, no '+''. While it clarifies the phone number format, it omits details like whether numbers must be in international format or if the creator should be included. The compensation is partial.

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's purpose: 'Create a WhatsApp group.' The verb 'create' and resource 'group' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like whatsapp_send_text or whatsapp_update_group_participants, though it does not explicitly differentiate from all group creation tasks.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as whatsapp_update_group_participants for adding members to existing groups, or whatsapp_list_groups for viewing groups. The agent receives no context on prerequisites (e.g., must be connected) or scenarios where calling this tool would fail.

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