whoop_summary

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

The description indicates the tool is read-only (provides data) and aggregates averages and trends. With no annotations, it carries the full burden but does not detail any side effects, authorization needs, or limitations. It is adequate but not extensive.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core functionality and a use case. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 one parameter and an existing output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and use. It mentions the combined metrics (recovery, sleep, strain) and usage context, though it could add more about behavioral aspects.

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 that the output includes per-day data plus averages and trends, implying the 'days' parameter controls the range. It adds meaningful context beyond the schema, which only has a title and default.

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 tool provides a combined daily overview of recovery, sleep, and strain. It explicitly labels it as the standard tool for weekly summaries, distinguishing it from sibling tools that 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.

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

The description gives a clear usage context: 'The standard tool for questions like 'How was my week?''. This guides the agent to use it for broad overviews, implying sibling tools are for more specific queries. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use it.

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