meta-mcp

List WA message templates under a WABA

wa_message_templates

Retrieve WhatsApp message templates for a given WhatsApp Business Account ID. Supports pagination and field selection.

Instructions

GET /{waba_id}/message_templates.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "waba_id": "<waba_id>"
    },
    "name": "wa_message_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`waba_id`	Yes
`fields`	No
`limit`	No
`auto_paginate`	No
`max_pages`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 10, 2026

TDQS

D1.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations exist, and the description only provides the endpoint. There is no disclosure of error behavior, rate limits, or pagination behavior despite relevant parameters. The description fails to inform the agent about side effects or constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It provides minimal actionable information and omits essential details.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness1/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the return format, pagination, or any other behavioral aspects needed for proper invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention any parameters or their meanings. The agent must rely solely on parameter names, which is insufficient for correct usage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the HTTP method and endpoint, which implies listing message templates under a WABA, but it does not explicitly state the action 'list' or clarify the scope. The title provides better clarity, but the description alone is vague.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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 wa_template_get. The description lacks any context for selection.

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