wwebjs-mcp

client_muteChat

Mute a WhatsApp chat indefinitely or until a specified date. Provide session and chat IDs, with an optional unmute timestamp to schedule automatic unmuting.

Instructions

[Client] Mute the chat. Mute this chat forever, unless a date is specified

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": {
      "sessionId": "<sessionId>"
    },
    "name": "client_muteChat"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chatId`	No	ID of the chat
`sessionId`	Yes	Unique identifier for the session (alphanumeric and - allowed)
`unmuteDate`	No	Timestamp when the chat will be muted, leave as is to mute forever

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavior of muting forever by default and conditionally until a specified date. It does not disclose reversibility, permission requirements, or effects on notifications, which are relevant for a mutation operation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is one sentence and front-loads the action. It is slightly redundant ('Mute the chat' then 'Mute this chat') but remains efficient. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple three-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior including the default duration. It does not explain prerequisites or side effects, but these are not critical for this low-complexity tool.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description partially reiterates the unmuteDate behavior but adds no new semantics beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool mutes a chat, with a specific verb and resource. The '[Client]' prefix and explicit 'Mute the chat' differentiate it from sibling tools like client_unmuteChat and channel_mute. The added detail about duration further clarifies scope.

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?

The description implies the tool is used to mute chats, with the option to set a temporary mute via unmuteDate. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or exclude other contexts like channel muting. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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

Deploy Server