whatsapp_get_status_privacy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Read-only' is largely redundant. It adds the return content ('privacy settings'), which is mild added context, but discloses nothing about scope, auth, or format beyond the safety profile.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The purpose is stated first and every sentence carries information.

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 zero-param, read-only tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description tells the agent what it retrieves and that it is safe. Only the exact shape of the returned settings is left unstated, which is a minor gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline of 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (who can see this number's status updates), and clarifies the return (privacy settings). It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling whatsapp_get_privacy_settings, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as whatsapp_get_privacy_settings or whatsapp_set_privacy_setting. The agent must infer the context entirely.

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