whatsapp_update_group_participants

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

With no annotations, the description has the full burden. It mentions the phone number format (no '+') but fails to disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, potential consequences of removal, or error conditions.

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 concise at two sentences, with the first sentence stating the purpose and the second detailing parameters. No unnecessary words, though more detail could fit without losing conciseness.

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 tool's potential for destructive actions (removing participants), the description lacks warnings or prerequisites. It also does not explain the output schema or handle edge cases, making it incomplete for safe use.

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 explain all parameters. It partially covers 'action' and 'participants' but omits 'group_jid' entirely, leaving a required parameter unexplained.

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 'Add or remove' and the resource 'group participants'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like whatsapp_create_group or whatsapp_get_group_info by focusing on participant modification.

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, such as when to add vs. remove participants, or prerequisites like being a group admin.

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