WHOOP Recoveries

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds context beyond that: sorted ordering, conditional availability of metrics ('when scored'), required OAuth scope, and a non-medical-advice disclaimer. 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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The action and sorting behavior are front-loaded, and every clause adds value: returns fields, scope requirement, and disclaimer.

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 rich schema, output schema, and read-safe annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, ordering, returned metrics, scope, and conditional availability. It does not mention pagination or privacy-mode behavior, but those are documented in the parameter schema, so the remaining gap is minor.

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 high at 89%, so the schema already documents most parameters like start, end, limit, pagination, and privacy mode. The description adds sorting and return-value context but does not itself explain the parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 names the exact operation ('List WHOOP recoveries'), the sorting behavior (by related sleep start time descending), and the key returned metrics (recovery score, HRV, RHR, SpO2, skin temperature). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as whoop_list_sleeps and whoop_list_workouts.

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?

It states the required auth scope ('Requires read:recovery scope') and implies it is the endpoint for listing recovery records. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings like whoop_get_cycle_recovery or whoop_recovery_trend, and it does not mention exclusions or alternatives.

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