whatsapp_leave_community

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds genuinely useful behavior: other members are notified, rejoining requires a new invite (i.e., the action is effectively irreversible without outside help), and it returns a success confirmation.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded ahead of the consequences.

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 destructive, multi-effect operation with no output schema, the description covers the key side effects (notifications, rejoin barrier) and the return shape. It only lacks guidance on when this is the right call relative to whatsapp_leave_group.

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?

Only one parameter, and schema coverage is 100% with the 'Community JID' description already in the schema (the output also lacks a description). The description adds nothing about the id field, so the baseline 3 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 and resource ('Leave a community and all its groups'), and the scope phrase 'and all its groups' implicitly separates it from the sibling whatsapp_leave_group, which acts on a single group.

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?

The description explains consequences but never says when to use this tool versus whatsapp_leave_group or when not to use it. No prerequisites or alternatives are named.

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