whatsapp_set_community_locked

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a mutation operation and the effect on editing permissions, but does not mention requirements (e.g., admin rights), reversibility, or side effects. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence of 8 words, front-loading the key information. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly efficient.

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 is a simple toggle with fully described parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits details like required permissions or effect on existing settings. For a simple tool, this is acceptable but not excellent.

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 already covers both parameters (id, enabled) with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Set'), the resource ('community locked mode'), and the effect ('only admins can edit info'). It effectively distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like set_community_name or set_community_description.

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 (e.g., set_group_locked) or when not to use it. The description lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios for its usage.

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