Manage the account's profile

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint, openWorldHint, and non-idempotent, but the description adds real value on top: it discloses that reset_contact_link revokes the old link permanently ('the old link stops working'), that delete_picture is irreversible, that set_picture returns the picture, and that a JPEG is required. It stops short of covering rate limits or auth specifics.

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?

Front-loads the one-line resource definition, then a scannable bulleted action list where each bullet carries an operative constraint. Slightly verbose in re-describing the QR link, but every line earns its place.

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 five-action, 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers all branches, required flags, and destructive consequences. It is complete enough to invoke correctly, with only minor gaps around error/response behavior.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so character limits, URL pattern, base64 alternative, and confirm semantics are all documented in the schema. The description reinforces which parameters belong to which action but adds no new syntax or format detail, matching the baseline 3.

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 resource (the linked number's own WhatsApp profile) with its concrete fields (display name, About, picture, contact QR link) and enumerates every action. The phrase 'the linked number's own WhatsApp profile' cleanly separates it from the similarly-named update_account sibling.

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 action list implies when each operation applies, and destructive actions are gated with 'Needs `confirm: true`'. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives such as update_account or get_account_qr_code, so the agent must infer selection.

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