WHOOP Cache Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the tool's safety profile is clear. The description adds value by noting that the cache is optional and can be enabled via environment variables, providing behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 consists of two sentences: the first states the purpose, and the second provides enabling information. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous words, making it highly concise and efficient.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter, and an output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. It adequately covers the core purpose and enabling context, though it could briefly mention the cache status output (e.g., enabled/disabled) for completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, meaning the 'response_format' parameter has no description. The tool description does not explain this parameter's purpose or effect, failing to compensate for the gap. The parameter is optional and self-explanatory, but with low coverage, the description should add value.

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 shows optional local SQLite cache status, using a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('cache status'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'whoop_connection_status' and 'whoop_data_inventory', which serve different purposes.

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 implies usage by mentioning how to enable the cache, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no comparison or exclusion of sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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