wwebjs-mcp

message_forward

Forward a WhatsApp message from one chat to another. Specify the source chat, message ID, and destination chat to complete the transfer.

Instructions

[Message] Delete a message from the chat

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": "message_forward"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`chatId`	No	The chat id which contains the message
`messageId`	No	Unique WhatsApp identifier for the message
`sessionId`	Yes	Unique identifier for the session (alphanumeric and - allowed)
`destinationChatId`	No	The chat id to forward the message to

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Aug 2, 2026

TDQS

D1.3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It not only fails to disclose any behavioral traits but actively misstates the action as deletion, which is incorrect for a forward operation.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single short sentence, but it does not earn its place because it is factually wrong. Brevity without correctness is not conciseness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

This is a 4-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description completely fails to explain the forward action, the need for a destination chat, or any other operational context.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters, giving a baseline of 3. However, the description's incorrect 'delete' wording actively misleads parameter interpretation, making the description worse than no description at all.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description states 'Delete a message from the chat' but the tool is named message_forward and the schema includes destinationChatId for forwarding. This directly contradicts the tool's actual purpose and is misleading.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

There is no guidance on when to use this tool. Sibling tools like message_delete, message_reply, and message_edit exist, but the description does not differentiate between forwarding and other message operations.

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

Deploy Server