Check WHOOP authentication

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

Annotations already declare this is a safe, read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying what the report contains (scopes, expiry) and how to interpret failure states, which goes beyond the annotation hints. It doesn't contradict annotations.

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?

Two terse sentences deliver the purpose, the key output details, and the primary use case. Information is front-loaded and every clause adds value, with no redundancy or 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?

For a zero-parameter status tool, the description fully conveys its role and diagnostic value. An output schema exists to document return shape, so the description doesn't need to list fields. The failure-mode guidance completes the picture within the broader tool landscape.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 is appropriate. The description correctly focuses on behavior rather than parameter details, and the empty schema leaves nothing unexplained.

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 uses the specific verb 'Report' and clearly states the resource: WHOOP authentication status including token validity, scopes, and expiry. This distinguishes it from siblings like whoop_login, whoop_logout, and data-fetching tools.

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 explicitly advises to call this tool first when a data tool fails, and explains that it distinguishes between three failure modes (never logged in, token expired, scope not granted). This is direct, actionable guidance with clear context and no ambiguity.

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