sendpulse_get_contactFetch WhatsApp contact details using a contact ID, with optional account selection for SendPulse accounts.
Get a WhatsApp contact's details by their contact ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Contact ID | |
| account | No | Account name (only one configured: brand_a) | brand_a |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint:false, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that this is a WhatsApp contact lookup returning 'details'; it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or returned fields.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It puts the verb and resource first and ends with the identifying parameter.
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 read-by-ID tool, annotations and the schema cover safety and parameter semantics. The description is sufficient for invocation, though it does not enumerate the contact details returned and there is no output schema to compensate.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents both id and account, including the brand_a default. The description adds no format, syntax, or usage detail beyond 'contact ID'.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('WhatsApp contact's details'), and scopes retrieval by contact ID. The singular 'a contact' contrasts with sibling sendpulse_get_contacts_by_tag without needing to inspect either schema.
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?
Gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. Usage is only implied by the required contact ID parameter and the name of the sibling list tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.