Start WHOOP login

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

Annotations mark the tool as readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds behavioral context: it doesn't complete login itself, requires external user browser action, and relies on a redirect URI with code/state parameters. This exceeds the annotation-only information.

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 short paragraphs – the first states the primary output, the second explains the process. No redundant words, all sentences contribute.

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 tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the entire flow: what the user receives, what they must do, and how the flow continues into whoop_complete_login. No major gaps.

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 no parameters (schema properties empty), so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, as none exist; nothing more is needed.

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 explicitly states 'Return a URL the user must open in a browser to authorise this server' – a specific verb, resource, and outcome. It references the subsequent whoop_complete_login step, distinguishing it from sibling 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?

The description clearly implies the flow: open returned URL, complete consent, then pass code/state to whoop_complete_login. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., when already authenticated), but the sequential context makes usage clear.

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