WHOOP Daily Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: it states 'does not provide medical advice' and 'does not store data locally,' which are behavioral traits beyond the annotations. It also clarifies it fetches WHOOP v2 records, giving more operational detail.

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 short paragraphs. The first sentence is a clear, front-loaded purpose. The second paragraph succinctly lists what it does and adds disclaimers. It avoids excessive detail, though the second paragraph could be slightly tighter.

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 the tool's complexity (workflow combining multiple data sources) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main aspects: inputs (fetches recent records), processing (defensive baseline), and outputs (readiness, sleep, load, diagnostics, action candidates). It does not discuss authentication prerequisites, but the sibling context suggests auth is handled elsewhere.

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 67% (days and timezone are described, response_format has enum but no text). The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already documents most parameters clearly. The response_format enum values (markdown/json) are self-explanatory, so no additional description is necessary.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Build a privacy-conscious daily performance summary from WHOOP recovery, sleep, cycle and workout data.' It clearly states the tool's function and distinguishes it from siblings like whoop_weekly_summary by focusing on 'daily' and the workflow nature.

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 describing the workflow (fetches records, computes baseline, returns recommendations) but never explicitly states when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or name sibling tools, so guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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