Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
whoop-mcp

whoop-mcp

by d00ennis
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

whoop_sync

Sync WHOOP data to a local database and generate a Life-OS export, automatically catching up from the last sync when no days are specified.

Instructions

Daten von WHOOP in die lokale Datenbank holen und den Life-OS-Export schreiben.

Ohne days wird ab dem letzten Sync nachgeholt.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "whoop_sync"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions fetching and writing, but omits details on side effects like overwriting data, rate limits, or required permissions. Insufficient for safe invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Efficient use of words, though some behavioral details could be added without significant bloat.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequately covers basic functionality and default sync behavior, but lacks information on what data types are synced, prerequisites, and conflict handling. Given the output schema exists but is not visible, completeness is moderate.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Describes the default behavior when 'days' is null, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not explain the effect of providing an integer value (e.g., number of days to sync).

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it fetches WHOOP data and writes to local database and exports, identifying action and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools that focus on specific data types.

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 guidance on using without 'days' to catch up from last sync, but lacks comparison to sibling tools like whoop_recovery, leaving the agent guessing when to prefer this tool over alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools