List recoveries

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral details: pagination via next_token, limit capped at 25 by WHOOP, and default date range behavior. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand paging and defaults.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence summary followed by a clearly formatted argument list. Every line adds value, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description covers purpose, fields, parameters, defaults, and pagination. An output schema exists, so return value details are not needed. It is complete for a list tool with optional parameters.

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%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains all four parameters: start/end as ISO 8601 with an example, limit capped at 25, and next_token as a cursor for continued pagination. This exceeds what the schema provides.

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 'List recovery records' and specifies the exact fields returned (recovery score %, HRV ms, resting heart rate bpm). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sleeps or list_workouts, which focus on different data types.

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 gives useful usage context: start and end default to the last 7 days when both omitted, and next_token enables pagination. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, though the resource is unique among siblings.

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