WHOOP Quickstart

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that the tool 'adapts to current state (env vars set? token present? what's next?)' and is a 3-step walkthrough, which goes beyond the annotation hints.

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?

The description is two sentences long, with no redundant phrases. The first sentence defines the tool's core behavior, and the second provides the exact user query that should trigger it. Every word 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers its purpose and usage trigger well. However, it does not explain what the tool returns or the meaning of the response_format parameter, which could leave an agent uncertain about expected output. The adaptive nature is hinted but not detailed enough for full completeness.

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?

The schema has one parameter, response_format, with no description in the schema (0% coverage). The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions. Although the enum is self-explanatory, the description contributes zero 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function as a 'Personalized 3-step setup walkthrough for the human user' and provides a concrete trigger phrase ('how do I connect WHOOP?'). This distinguishes it from generic onboarding tools, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like whoop_onboarding.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to call the tool: 'Call this first when the user asks "how do I connect WHOOP?"' This is a clear context signal. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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