get_whatsapp_chat

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Get full details' which implies a read operation but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, side effects, error handling, or permission requirements. This lack of disclosure is a gap for a tool that could have side effects.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes a well-structured 'Args' section. Every sentence adds value without repetition or fluff.

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 simple getter with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description provides adequate context. It names the resource and parameter source, and since output schema exists, return values need not be described. The only minor gap is lack of guidance on expected failure modes, but overall it is complete for this context.

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?

The input schema only defines 'name' as a string. The description compensates fully by explaining it is a WhatsApp activity ID, providing an example format ('ACT00123'), and pointing to the 'name' field from list_whatsapp_chats. This adds clear meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Get full details of a single WhatsApp activity by its ID' – a specific verb (Get) + resource (WhatsApp activity) + identifier. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_messenger_chat or get_instagram_chat, which target different channels.

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 implies usage when you have a WhatsApp activity ID, and suggests referencing the 'name' field from list_whatsapp_chats. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this over alternatives or mention any exclusions, so usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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