whatsapp_group_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Fetches' (read-only) but fails to mention any side effects, required connection state, what 'live info' specifically includes, or return format. This is a significant gap for a tool that might depend on external state.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though 'live info' is a bit vague and could be more precisely stated without much added length.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate but lacks details on what 'live info' encompasses and how the group is specified. Given the absence of output schema and annotations, more context about return values and usage would improve completeness.

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 has zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't need to explain any parameters, but it also doesn't clarify how the tool identifies which group to fetch, which could be confusing. 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetches') and clearly identifies the resource ('WhatsApp group's live info + participant list'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'whatsapp_list_groups' which lists groups rather than details for a specific group, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus other WhatsApp tools, nor any prerequisites such as needing an active connection or selecting a group first. The description gives no context for its intended use case or exclusions.

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