WhatsApp Business MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior (cursor-based via 'after') and return format ('JSON with list and pagination info'), but omits safety profile (read-only), rate limits, or error conditions.

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?

Uses efficient docstring structure with 'Args' and 'Returns' sections. Every line provides specific constraints or semantics; no redundant or filler content despite the structured format.

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 zero schema descriptions, the description adequately covers all filter parameters and pagination. With an output schema existing, the brief return description is sufficient, though it could note that all filters are optional (implied by schema but not explicit).

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by documenting all 5 parameters: 'limit' (range 1-100, default 20), 'after' (pagination semantics), 'name' (exact match behavior), and valid enum values for 'status' and 'category'.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('WhatsApp message templates'). Distinction from siblings (create, delete, get_detail, etc.) is implicit via the verb but lacks explicit scope clarification (e.g., which account's templates).

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_template_detail' or 'check_template_status'. No mention of prerequisites or when listing is preferable to other operations.

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