WHOOP Demo

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

The description adds the important behavioral guarantee that shapes are verified against real tools by a build gate, ensuring compatibility. Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent, so this is extra context beyond the structured data, not a 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 with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the action and resources, the second adds a crucial reliability guarantee. Every word earns its place.

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 no output schema and one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, usage context, and behavioral guarantees. It is complete enough for an agent to decide to call it and understand what to expect.

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 mention the 'response_format' parameter at all. The enum provides some indication, but the description fails to explain the trade-offs between markdown and json outputs, leaving the agent to infer meaning.

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 it 'returns realistic example payloads' of specific WHOOP tools, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the real sibling tools by being a demo, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says it is for seeing the contract 'before calling real WHOOP APIs,' providing clear context for when to use it. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives by name, but the context is sufficient for a demo tool.

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