WHOOP Profile Update (shared wellness profile)

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

Discloses that the tool writes to a local file, requires user intent, and rejects secret-shaped fields. Annotations provide minimal info; the description fills gaps with important safety and cross-connector behavior.

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?

Concise single paragraph with front-loaded action. Every sentence adds value, no filler.

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?

Missing explanation of return value or success confirmation since there is no output schema. Also lacks error case information. Partially complete with behavioral constraints but incomplete on outcome.

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 descriptions already cover two of three parameters (patch and explicit_user_intent) adequately. The description adds the file path but does not provide new semantic meaning for parameters beyond what is in 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?

Description clearly states the tool persists a partial patch to the shared wellness profile, specifying the file path and listing top-level fields. It is distinguished from the read-only sibling whoop_profile_get.

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?

Description explicitly requires explicit_user_intent=true and warns against storing secrets, providing clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use.

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