whatsapp_search_messages

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. However, it only states 'Search WhatsApp messages' without indicating whether it is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The behavioral profile is completely unspecified.

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 short sentence with no excess words, but it is under-specified. Conciseness is positive, but the lack of content limits its usefulness.

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 absence of output schema, parameters, and annotations, the description fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool returns or how to invoke it effectively. The tool's behavior and return value are entirely opaque.

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 schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how the search is performed (e.g., query string, criteria) or what context is used. Baseline 3 is reduced due to lack of useful information.

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 'Search WhatsApp messages' is a clear verb+resource but is essentially a tautology of the tool name. It lacks distinction from sibling tools like 'search_messages' or 'whatsapp_read_messages', and does not explain what aspect of messages is searched (content, metadata, etc.).

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. There is no mention of when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or comparisons to siblings like 'search_messages' or 'whatsapp_list_chats'.

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