WHOOP Cycle

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the meaningful OAuth scope requirement, which is not present in the annotations or schema. No contradiction with 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the essential purpose and a key prerequisite without any redundant words or repetition of schema details.

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 getter with an output schema and rich annotations, the description is sufficient. It does not discuss privacy_mode or response_format, but those are already documented in the schema, so the gap is acceptable.

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 already describes 3 of 4 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only a slight clarification that the id should be numeric, but does not explain response_format or privacy_mode, which are left to the schema.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('one WHOOP cycle'), and the lookup method ('by numeric cycle id'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like whoop_list_cycles and whoop_get_cycle_sleep.

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 mentions the required OAuth scope ('read:cycles'), but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The singular 'one' implies single-resource retrieval, but no direct comparison to list or related getters is given.

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