Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• get_workoutsA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it disclose any side effects, authorization requirements, or rate limits. While the nature of retrieving recent workouts suggests no side effects, the lack of explicit confirmation reduces transparency.

  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?

  The description is concise with two sentences plus an args section, all front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The structure is clear and easy to parse.

  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?

  Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, known return fields), the description covers the essential aspects. However, it does not specify ordering (e.g., most recent first) or any pagination details. An output schema exists, so return type details are not required, but missing ordering constraints could cause ambiguity.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  The input schema has only the 'limit' parameter with a default value of 5. The description adds meaning by explaining it as 'Number of workouts to return (default: 5, no limit)' and clarifies that omitting the parameter returns 5 workouts. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this additional context is valuable.

  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?

  The description clearly states 'Get recent workouts with strain and heart rate data.' and lists the specific data fields returned (sport type, strain, duration, calories, heart rate zones). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recovery_trend, get_sleep_trend, and get_today_summary, which focus on different health metrics.

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description implies it is for retrieving workout data, but does not state when not to use it or mention alternatives. For example, it could specify that for daily summaries or recovery data, one should use the respective sibling tools.

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

• get_recovery_trendA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It states 'Get recovery scores', indicating a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly confirm no side effects or mention permissions, though the nature is clear.

  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?

  Three sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains the parameter, and the third provides outcome context. Every sentence adds value.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, no annotations, output schema present), the description covers purpose, parameter, and outcome. No gaps are apparent.

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

  Parameters5/5

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

  Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains the 'days' parameter as 'Number of days to look back (default: 7, no limit)', adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

  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?

  The description clearly states 'Get recovery scores' and 'Shows the trend of your recovery', specifying the verb (get) and resource (recovery scores). It distinguishes from siblings like get_sleep_trend and get_workouts, which target different health metrics.

  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?

  The description implies usage for trend analysis with 'to help identify patterns', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_today_summary might offer a snapshot). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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

• get_sleep_trendA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses it shows sleep duration, efficiency, and performance trends. Adequate for a simple read operation, though could mention data freshness.

  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 concise sentences plus parameter doc. No fluff, front-loaded with purpose, efficient.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Output schema exists, so return values are covered. Description mentions key output fields (duration, efficiency, trends). Complete for a one-parameter tool.

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

  Parameters5/5

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

  Schema has 0% coverage, but description adds 'no limit' to the days parameter, clarifying scope beyond the default value. Essential behavioral detail.

  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?

  Clearly states it gets sleep data for last N days, specifying the resource (sleep data) and action (get). Distinguishes from siblings like get_recovery_trend by focusing on sleep trends.

  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?

  Provides parameter details but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to siblings. Implied usage is for sleep trends over days, but no guidance on alternatives.

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

• get_today_summaryA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Discloses the returned data categories (recovery score, sleep duration, strain, etc.) without needing further detail, since no annotations are present. Could mention that it is a read-only operation, but the description adequately implies safety.

  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?

  Three concise sentences: first defines purpose, second recommends usage, third lists outputs. No wasted words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Given the presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what the tool returns. It covers the main use case completely for a daily check-in.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  Tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Baseline 4 for no parameters; description adds no parameter info but none is needed.

  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?

  The description uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'today's complete WHOOP status: recovery, sleep, and strain in one call.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_recovery_trend' and 'get_sleep_trend' which focus on individual metrics.

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

  Usage Guidelines4/5

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

  States 'This is the recommended daily check-in tool,' providing clear context for when to use it. Does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternatives, but the parenthetical mention of siblings implies those for detailed trends.

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