Sono do WHOOP: duração, eficiência, performance (%), estágios (leve, REM, profundo), frequência respiratória. Paginado por limit/start/end/next_token; ou passe sleep_ids (UUID) pra registros específicos. Dados de wearable, não substituem avaliação médica profissional.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| start | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| sleep_ids | No | ||
| next_token | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains pagination via limit/start/end/next_token and the alternative of passing sleep_ids, and includes a disclaimer about wearable data not replacing medical advice. Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent, so this extra context is valuable.
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?
Three concise sentences that front-load the data fields, then pagination details, and end with a disclaimer. No wasted words.
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?
The description is adequate for a read-only tool with no output schema: it lists the returned metrics, pagination options, and the alternative to fetch specific records. However, it could clarify the start/end format and the account parameter.
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 description explains the role of limit/start/end/next_token for pagination and sleep_ids for specific records, covering most parameters. However, the 'account' parameter is not described, and the exact meaning of start/end (e.g., date range vs cursor) is ambiguous.
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 that it provides WHOOP sleep data including duration, efficiency, performance, stages, and respiratory rate. It differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on sleep metrics, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list'.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like whoop_workouts or whoop_recovery. It mentions pagination and sleep_ids but doesn't provide context for tool selection or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.