WHOOP Profile Get (shared wellness profile)

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real context beyond them: the concrete file path, the read-only nature, the cross-connector sharing, and the fact that missing critical fields are surfaced. It doesn't discuss failure modes (e.g. profile not yet created), but the safety profile is fully covered.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the verb and file path, then the return contents, then the cross-connector scope. No filler; the field enumeration earns its length because there is no output schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by listing the profile sections returned. The only gap is the unaddressed response_format parameter and how it changes the output shape.

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% for the single response_format parameter, and the description never mentions it, so nothing compensates for the gap. The enum (markdown/json) is largely self-explanatory, which keeps this above a 1, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 and resource ('Read the shared Delx wellness profile') and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what it gets. The cross-connector note distinguishes it from a connector-specific profile read, though it does not explicitly separate it from the near-named sibling whoop_get_profile.

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?

Usage is only implied: it reads the shared profile file, and the cross-connector sentence hints the same data is reachable from other MCPs. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and the confusable sibling whoop_get_profile is never addressed.

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