List cycles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds value by noting the newest cycle is usually in progress and the default date range. It does not contradict annotations and provides behavioral context beyond the structured fields.

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 with two sentences in the first paragraph and a second paragraph for parameter details. It is front-loaded with purpose and ordering, then parameter guidance, with no unnecessary words.

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?

Given the output schema exists (return values likely documented there), the description covers purpose, ordering, default range, and parameter formats completely. It is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 thoroughly explains the accepted formats for start and end parameters, adding significant meaning. However, the limit parameter is not described, leaving a small gap.

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 the tool lists physiological cycles (WHOOP's wake-to-wake days) with specific data fields (strain, calories, heart rate) and ordering (newest first). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_cycle (singular) and get_daily_summary (daily aggregates).

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 specifies default behavior (last 14 days) and explains accepted date formats for start/end parameters. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives, the context implies it's for listing multiple cycles, and the parameter guidance is clear.

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