whatsapp_delete_status

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds valuable context beyond them: contacts stop seeing the status, the action cannot be undone, and it returns a success confirmation. It does not contradict the annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every sentence adds useful information about effect, reversibility, and return, with no waste.

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 one-parameter deletion tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations, the description is complete. It states the effect, irreversibility, and return confirmation; an output schema is not needed.

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%, so the single messageId parameter is already documented in the schema. The description's phrase 'by its message ID' does not add format or syntax details beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the appropriate baseline.

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 names a specific verb (Delete) and resource (a status this number posted) and scopes it by message ID. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling delete tools like whatsapp_delete_message because it targets statuses rather than chat messages.

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?

It clearly frames the context: deleting a status that this number posted, by its message ID. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this versus other deletion tools, leaving that to inference.

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