WHOOP MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

WHOOP Cycles

whoop_list_cycles

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve WHOOP physiological cycles with start/end date filters and pagination. Use to fetch cycle history for recovery, strain, and sleep analysis; requires read:cycles scope.

Instructions

List WHOOP physiological cycles. Supports start/end filters and WHOOP pagination. Requires read:cycles scope.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`end`	No	ISO 8601 date-time with timezone, e.g. 2026-04-30T00:00:00Z
`limit`	No	WHOOP page size. WHOOP allows a maximum of 25.
`start`	No	ISO 8601 date-time with timezone, e.g. 2026-04-30T00:00:00Z
`all_pages`	No	Fetch multiple pages up to max_pages.
`max_pages`	No	Maximum pages to fetch when all_pages is true.
`next_token`	No	WHOOP pagination token returned by a previous call.
`privacy_mode`	No	Optional per-call payload privacy override. Defaults to WHOOP_PRIVACY_MODE or structured. raw returns full WHOOP API payloads, not raw device sensor streams.
`response_format`	No		markdown
`explicit_user_intent`	No	Required true when privacy_mode=raw (agent escalation of redaction).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes
`records`	Yes
`endpoint`	Yes
`has_more`	Yes
`next_token`	No
`privacy_mode`	Yes
`pages_fetched`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.6Oct 4, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.6.5Aug 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / end / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"

changedInput schema / properties / start / pattern

Previous value: -"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d(?::[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"New value: +"^(?:(?:\\d\\d[2468][048]|\\d\\d[13579][26]|\\d\\d0[48]|[02468][048]00|[13579][26]00)-02-29|\\d{4}-(?:(?:0[13578]|1[02])-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|3[01])|(?:0[469]|11)-(?:0[1-9]|[12]\\d|30)|(?:02)-(?:0[1-9]|1\\d|2[0-8])))T(?:(?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d:[0-5]\\d(?:\\.\\d+)?(?:Z|([+-](?:[01]\\d|2[0-3]):[0-5]\\d)))$"

Addedv0.6.1Aug 10, 2026
Removedv0.5.4Jul 18, 2026
First observedv0.5.3Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral fact beyond that: the required 'read:cycles' scope, plus that pagination is supported. It omits any note on the privacy_mode/explicit_user_intent escalation mechanics, which is the remaining gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the prerequisite scope stated last. Nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the schema covers the nine parameters thoroughly. The description adequately frames a read-only paginated list tool, though it could note the multi-page (all_pages/next_token) interaction pattern more explicitly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 89%, so parameters are already well documented in the schema (ISO 8601 formats, max 25 page size, max_pages). The description only restates start/end filtering and pagination, adding no syntax or semantics beyond the structured fields.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('List WHOOP physiological cycles'), which cleanly separates it from the singular sibling whoop_get_cycle. It does not explicitly name any sibling or scope boundary, so it stops short of full differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Mentions supported filters (start/end) and pagination, implying when it is useful, and names the required auth scope. However it gives no when-to-use-vs-alternative guidance, e.g. when to prefer whoop_daily_summary or whoop_get_cycle over listing.

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