whatsapp_disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'logs out the linked device' but does not detail side effects, reversibility, or state changes after disconnection, leaving the agent underinformed about the tool's impact.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and context. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundant or extraneous information.

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 action with no parameters, annotations, or output schema, the description is relatively complete. It tells the agent what the tool does and how, but could benefit from noting expected outcomes (e.g., connection state). Still adequate given simplicity.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the input schema fully describes this (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter information, but this is acceptable given the absence of parameters. Baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 (unlink/logout), the resource (WhatsApp from Local MCP, linked device on this Mac), and the mechanism (via wacli). It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool 'whatsapp_connect'.

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 clear context that this tool is for disconnecting WhatsApp from Local MCP, implying use after a connection is established. However, it does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool, nor mention alternatives beyond the implicit 'whatsapp_connect'.

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