connection_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It implies a read operation via 'Get', and specifies the returned data (connection state and active account). It does not disclose potential side effects or auth requirements, but for a status check, this is largely adequate.

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 14 words with no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient information for an agent to understand what the tool returns. It covers the essential output fields (connection state and active account) and the read-only nature is clear. Sibling tools are action-oriented, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema is empty. The description adds meaningful value by specifying what the tool returns (connection state and active account), which is not present in the schema. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description exceeds this.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'WhatsApp connection state (connected/connecting/disconnected) and the active account'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are all action-oriented (send, mark, etc.).

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, the context of the tool name and sibling tools strongly implies it is for checking connection status before performing other actions. A small gap exists in not explicitly stating this.

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