Edit a WhatsApp message you sent

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

The annotations already indicate this is a mutating, non-idempotent operation. The description adds the important 15-minute time constraint and the fallback behavior when that constraint is exceeded, which meaningfully helps the agent predict outcomes.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core action, and the second delivers the critical time constraint and alternative action.

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 two-parameter mutating tool, the description covers the action, the prerequisite, the key platform limitation, and the fallback. It does not specify exact failure behavior or return value, but those are not essential for calling this tool correctly.

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%, with both 'text' and 'message_id' already described. The description reinforces that text is the replacement and that the message must have been sent by the linked account, but it does not add significant parameter detail beyond the schema.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Replace the text of a message the linked account sent.' This clearly distinguishes editing from sibling tools like send_message, delete_message, and react_to_message.

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 gives an explicit usage condition: editing is only allowed within 15 minutes of sending. It also tells the agent what to do otherwise: 'after that send a correction instead,' which points toward send_message.

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