WHOOP Agent Manifest

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description reinforces safety by stating 'Does not read WHOOP or expose secrets', adding value beyond annotations without contradiction.

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, no redundancy. Every word serves a purpose. Front-loaded with key information.

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?

For a simple tool with output schema, the description covers purpose and safety adequately but lacks parameter semantics. Given that there are no required parameters and low complexity, the missing parameter info is a gap.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the 'client' or 'response_format' parameters or their enum values. With only 2 enum parameters, the description should have provided guidance on their meaning and defaults.

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?

Description clearly states the tool provides machine-readable guidance for AI agents operating the WHOOP MCP, and explicitly states it does not read WHOOP data or expose secrets, distinguishing it from sibling tools that access WHOOP data.

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?

Description implies it is used for install and runtime guidance, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like whoop_capabilities or whoop_onboarding. No exclusion criteria or context provided.

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