WACrew

buscar

Search WhatsApp messages and voice-note transcripts for a term, optionally within a group, returning newest matching snippets up to a configurable limit and flagging truncated results.

Instructions

Busca um texto nas mensagens e transcrições. Sem 'grupo', procura em todos. Retorna os trechos que casam (mais recentes primeiro), limitado a 'limite' (default 50) pra não estourar — se truncar, o retorno avisa em 'truncado'.

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": {
      "texto": "<texto>"
    },
    "name": "buscar"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`grupo`	No	slug para restringir a um grupo
`texto`	Yes	termo a procurar (case-insensitive)
`limite`	No	máx. de resultados (default 50); evita varrer todos os grupos e estourar

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does disclose non-obvious behavior: results are ordered most-recent-first, capped by 'limite' (default 50), and truncation is signalled via a 'truncado' field in the response. The rationale for the cap ('pra não estourar') tells the agent why results may be incomplete. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, though 'busca' strongly implies it.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, each doing distinct work: what is searched, the group-scope default, and the return shape with limit/truncation. The key scoping rule is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Because there is no output schema, the description must explain the return: it does so (matching snippets, most-recent-first ordering, a 'truncado' flag). What remains unsaid is how results are paginated or how to retrieve beyond the truncated set, which matters for a capped search tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: omitting 'grupo' means search across all groups, and 'limite' is tied to a visible truncation outcome rather than being a bare number. That clarifies the sematics of both optional parameters beyond their field descriptions.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names a specific verb+resource pair: 'Busca um texto nas mensagens e transcrições', which is clearly a full-text search over message and transcript content. It scopes the search with 'Sem grupo, procura em todos', so an agent knows this is a search tool and not a fetch-latest/read tool. It stops short of naming a sibling such as 'ler_mensagens' to contrast with, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied: use it to locate a term across messages/transcripts, and omit 'grupo' to widen the search to all groups. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative for reading a specific conversation, which the sibling list suggests exists. Adequate but leaves the agent to infer routing.

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