get_body_measurementsRetrieve your WHOOP profile's height, weight, and max heart rate for fitness calculations or personalized health tracking.
The user's height (meters), weight (kilograms) and max heart rate as configured in WHOOP.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| height_meter | Yes | ||
| max_heart_rate | Yes | ||
| weight_kilogram | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It lists the returned fields but does not state that this is a read-only/safe operation, whether authentication is required, or how the data is scoped to the user, leaving key behavioral traits unstated.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the exact measurements and their units.
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 a zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it specifies the returned data and units, and the output schema handles structure. However, without annotations, it could do more to clarify that this is a safe, read-only operation and when to prefer it over get_profile.
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?
There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful semantic detail about the returned measurements and their units, though it does not need to explain parameter syntax because no parameters exist.
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 identifies the exact data returned (height in meters, weight in kilograms, max heart rate) and scopes it to the user's WHOOP configuration. It is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb, but the tool name and title supply the retrieval action, making it distinguishable from siblings like get_profile or get_recovery.
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?
The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_profile. It does not state prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving usage inference entirely to the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.