WHOOP Cycle Recovery

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely new operational context: the required OAuth scope and a 'Not medical advice' disclaimer. It stops short of describing payload behavior tied to privacy_mode.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded before scope and disclaimer. Every clause 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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values and mutability need no explanation. Purpose, auth scope, and disclaimer are present; only sibling routing and the privacy_mode/escalation interplay are absent.

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 a high 75%, so the schema does most of the work, but the description mentions no parameters at all. It does not flag the privacy_mode=raw gating relationship with explicit_user_intent, which is the one nuance an agent would benefit from.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Get the recovery associated with a WHOOP cycle.' An agent can distinguish it from whoop_get_cycle and whoop_get_cycle_sleep by the 'recovery' resource, but the description never names those siblings or whoop_list_recoveries explicitly.

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?

Provides the prerequisite 'Requires read:recovery scope', which is a useful gate, but gives no when-to-use guidance versus siblings like whoop_list_recoveries or whoop_recovery_trend. Usage is only implied by the resource name.

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