Descobrir WABA ID e Phone Number ID

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is handled. The description adds that no input is required beyond the configured token, that results come from the accounts the token is entitled to see, and that a missing account indicates a System User assignment problem. It does not cover pagination or rate limits, but the added context is meaningful.

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?

Two tight paragraphs. The main capability and its payoff (correct IDs for the system) come first, and the troubleshooting note is separated for easy scanning. No sentence is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey what comes back, and it does: the WABA accounts accessible to the token, their phone numbers, and the correct IDs. It also covers the zero-parameter invocation and the common failure mode. The only minor gap is the lack of guidance on the response format choice.

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 is only one parameter, response_format, whose enum and meaning are already fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), including the markdown-vs-json distinction. The description adds nothing about it, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: it lists the WhatsApp Business accounts (WABAs) that the token can access, plus each account's phone numbers and the correct IDs. It also states the tool's distinct value, resolving confusion between the WhatsApp Manager ID and the WABA API ID. It never names an overlapping sibling such as wa_list_phone_numbers or wa_check_waba, so the agent has to infer which tool is the right one.

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 says the tool is the discovery step for the 'ids' phase: it starts from a token and yields the IDs needed to configure the system. It also gives a concrete troubleshooting condition: if the target account is missing, the System User was not assigned to it. It does not explicitly say when to prefer wa_list_phone_numbers or wa_check_waba instead.

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