Update WhatsApp Business Profile

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful constraints (max lengths for about and description, websites as JSON array) and states the return is a confirmation of update. This additional detail complements the annotations without contradiction.

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 well-structured with an 'Args' section and a 'Returns' statement. It is concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence provides useful information without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

The tool has 7 optional parameters, all fully documented in the schema, and the description covers the return value and important constraints. Annotations provide safety and idempotency context. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand when and how to use the tool.

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 the schema already documents all parameters with descriptions and constraints. The description repeats the parameter list and adds brief constraints (e.g., max lengths, JSON array), but it does not materially add new meaning beyond what is in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Update the WhatsApp Business Profile fields.' It uses a specific verb ('Update') and resource ('Business Profile'), and the list of fields makes the scope explicit. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool whatsapp_get_business_profile by indicating it modifies rather than retrieves.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for updating profile fields and implies it should be used when those fields need modification. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the sibling tool get_business_profile and the action word 'update' provide clear context for selection.

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