Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
WHOOP MCP

WHOOP MCP

by myke239
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_whoop_sleep

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a single sleep record by v2 UUID, preserving its score state and stage durations in milliseconds.

Instructions

Retrieve one sleep by v2 UUID, preserving score state and stage milliseconds.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "sleep_id": "<sleep_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_whoop_sleep"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sleep_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds some data-fidelity context by saying it preserves score state and stage milliseconds, but that phrase is vague and does not explain permissions, pagination, not-found behavior, or response shape.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with the operation and lookup key stated early. The phrase 'preserving score state and stage milliseconds' is concise but somewhat cryptic jargon.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter retrieval tool, the description is adequate at a minimum. However, with no output schema and no parameter description, it should say more about what is returned or how not-found cases behave; the only return hint is the vague 'preserving score state and stage milliseconds'.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

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 for the undocumented sleep_id parameter. It does clarify that the ID is a v2 UUID, which adds meaning beyond the schema, but it gives no format example, validation rule, or distinction from other ID forms.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a clear verb and resource: 'Retrieve one sleep'. It also specifies the lookup by v2 UUID, which implicitly distinguishes this from list_whoop_sleep, but it does not explicitly name or contrast with any sibling tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is only implied by 'by v2 UUID' and 'one sleep'. The description does not state when to use this instead of list_whoop_sleep, nor does it mention prerequisites, error conditions, or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools