List cycles (day strain)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior beyond that: results are returned 'most recent first', which the agent cannot learn from the schema or 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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the resource first, then the returned fields, then the ordering. Every clause earns its place with no filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 read-only paginated list tool with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields and the sort order, and the schema fully documents filtering and pagination. Only the absence of sibling routing and any explicit usage framing keeps it short of complete.

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 100% for all six parameters, including the date-bound semantics, days shortcut, limit and next_token pagination, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds nothing parameter-specific, which is the expected baseline of 3 here.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (physiological cycles / WHOOP days) and enumerates the payload fields (day strain, calories, HR, steps). This clearly separates it from get_cycle (singular), but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the other list_* siblings such as list_recoveries or list_sleeps.

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?

Usage is only implied: the reader infers you call this to page through recent daily cycles, and the schema's next_token/limit/days fields reinforce that. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisite, and no pointer to an alternative tool for a narrower query.

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