whatsapp_get_blocklist

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action 'Get' with no mention of read-only nature, response format, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it is extremely minimal; a slightly more structured or informative description would be better, but it is not verbose.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and no output schema, and the operation is straightforward (retrieving a list), the description is nearly complete. It lacks mention of what the list contains (e.g., contact IDs), but for a simple tool it is adequate.

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?

The input schema has 0 parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 when there are no parameters. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'list of all blocked contacts', clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like 'whatsapp_block_contact' (block operation) and 'whatsapp_get_contacts' (all contacts).

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?

No usage context is provided. The description does not advise when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. For a retrieval tool, it should clarify that it is read-only and does not filter by other criteria.

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