whatsapp_get_group_participants

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states a read-like operation without disclosing behavioral details such as whether it requires permissions, if it returns blocked participants, or if it has any side effects.

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 extremely concise at three words, which is efficient for a simple tool. It front-loads the purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no output schema, the description does not hint at the return value (e.g., list of participant JIDs or contact objects). This omission leaves the agent uncertain about the output format.

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 covers the 'id' parameter with description 'Group JID', but the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain what a JID is or how to obtain it.

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 'Get group participants' clearly indicates the tool retrieves participants of a group, matching its name. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'whatsapp_get_group' or 'whatsapp_get_group_info_from_link'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it doesn't mention that to get group metadata one should use 'whatsapp_get_group' instead.

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