whoop_cycles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: the data source is the local DB (not a live API call), newest-first ordering, and the sync prerequisite. It does not discuss pagination or truncation at the limit, which would be useful for a list tool returning up to 200 records.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering, then the storage/prerequisite constraint. Nothing is wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (day strain, energy, avg/max heart rate). For a two-parameter local read tool this is nearly complete; only pagination behavior is left unstated.

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 100%, so 'days' and 'limit' are already documented with defaults and bounds. The description adds no semantics beyond the schema for either parameter; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific resource ('Recent physiological cycles (WHOOP days)') with the fields it returns and the sort order, so an agent can distinguish it from whoop_recovery, whoop_sleep, and whoop_workouts. It does not explicitly name a sibling it is not, which keeps it just below a 5.

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?

Gives clear operational context: it reads the local database only and requires whoop_sync first to refresh. That is a real prerequisite an agent must honor. It stops short of stating exclusions or naming alternatives for related data (recovery, sleep).

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