Send Group Invite

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the write nature is known. The description adds the channel ('via WhatsApp') and the nature of the payload ('invite link'), but does not disclose potential side effects like requiring admin rights, number validity, or message limits. This is minimal but non-contradictory.

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 sentence with 12 words. It is front-loaded with the action verb and includes all essential elements without extraneous detail or repetition of schema information.

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 send operation with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is sufficient. It clearly communicates the action, and given no output schema, it need not explain return values. The tool's complexity is low, and the description covers it adequately.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond saying 'specified phone numbers', which mirrors the schema. Baseline of 3 applies as the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 uses a specific verb ('Send') and resource ('group invite link') with clear recipients ('specified phone numbers') and channel ('via WhatsApp'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_text or fetch_invite_code, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it vs alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., valid WhatsApp numbers, group admin permission) or suggest using check_whatsapp_numbers or fetch_invite_code when appropriate.

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