whatsapp_read_messages

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

No annotations are present, and the description only states 'reads messages' without disclosing behavioral traits such as whether messages are marked as read, chat selection constraints, or rate limits. The burden is high due to missing annotations.

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 sentence, concise but vague. It lacks front-loading of critical information, and the term 'specific' is unclear without corresponding parameters.

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?

Complexity is low, but no output schema exists. The description fails to explain what the returned messages include (e.g., content, metadata). For a read tool, this is a significant gap.

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 0 parameters (100% coverage), so baseline is 4. However, the description mentions 'specific WhatsApp chat,' implying a parameter that doesn't exist, contradicting the schema. This contradiction lowers the score.

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 states the tool reads messages from a specific WhatsApp chat, but does not specify how to identify the chat. With no parameters in the schema, the concept of 'specific chat' is unsupported, creating ambiguity. It distinguishes from siblings like 'whatsapp_search_messages' but not clearly from 'read_messages'.

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 alternatives like 'whatsapp_list_chats' or 'whatsapp_search_messages'. The description lacks context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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