get_chat

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It implies a read via "Get" but does not state permissions, rate limits, return shape, or what metadata is included beyond the last message option.

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 short and front-loaded, with the core action stated first and parameter details immediately after. Every sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool.

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 simple two-parameter read tool, the description covers purpose and parameters adequately. However, with no annotations or output schema, it leaves return-value shape and permissive context unstated, which would help an agent invoke it confidently.

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 0%, so the description must document the parameters, and it does: it explains chat_jid as the JID of the chat and include_last_message as whether to include the last message, including its default. It could go further by explaining JID format or where to obtain it, but both parameters are semantically covered.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Get WhatsApp chat metadata by JID." This clearly distinguishes it from bulk listers like list_chats, though it does not explicitly name which sibling to use for other retrieval cases.

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 phrase "by JID" implies this tool is for retrieving a single known chat, which is useful context. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus list_chats, get_direct_chat_by_contact, or get_contact_chats.

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