Skip to main content
Glama
wuapidev

wuapi MCP server

Official
by wuapidev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Send a poll

send_poll

Send a poll with 2 to 12 options. Votes arrive as poll.voted webhooks and in the message's poll tally (get_message).

Instructions

Send a poll with 2 to 12 options. Votes arrive as poll.voted webhooks and in the message's poll tally (get_message).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesRecipient: a phone number in E.164 with + (`+584241112233`), `lid:<digits>`, the `@username` of a contact the account already chats with, a group id (`...@g.us`), or a channel id (`...@newsletter`) the account administers.
optionsYes2 to 12 unique options.
mentionsNoContact ids to @mention (E.164 or `lid:<digits>`).
questionYesThe poll question.
accountIdYesThe wuapi account id of the linked number to act as (from list_accounts).
idempotencyKeyNoOptional. Reuse the same key when retrying this exact call: within 24 hours wuapi returns the first result instead of doing it twice.
selectableCountNoHow many options a voter may pick. 0 (default) means any number; 1 makes it single choice.
replyToMessageIdNoA wuapi message id in the same chat to quote (reply to). One exception, a private reply: a message someone else wrote in a group can be quoted in the direct chat with its author (`to` is that message's `from`).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.13.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / replyToMessageId / description
      Previous value: -"A wuapi message id in the same chat to quote (reply to)."New value: +"A wuapi message id in the same chat to quote (reply to). One exception, a private reply: a message someone else wrote in a group can be quoted in the direct chat with its author (`to` is that message's `from`)."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare it a non-read-only, open-world, non-idempotent, non-destructive write. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the async result channel: votes arrive as `poll.voted` webhooks and in the message poll tally. It does not mention idempotencyKey behavior or rate limits, so it is short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and constraint, and the second sentence carries the result-delivery information an agent needs. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description correctly fills the biggest gap by explaining how poll results manifest (webhooks plus tally). Combined with full schema coverage and annotations covering the safety profile, it is nearly complete, though preconditions for `to` (channel administration) are left to the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all eight parameters (recipient formats, mentions, selectableCount, idempotencyKey, replyToMessageId) are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates the 2-12 options constraint, adding no syntax or semantics beyond it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Send a poll') plus a concrete constraint (2 to 12 options), and it names the complementary read path (get_message poll tally), which separates it from the sibling vote_in_poll.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies when this is used (creating a poll whose votes come back asynchronously) and points to get_message for tallies, but it never explicitly contrasts with vote_in_poll or states preconditions such as needing an administered channel or group.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools