get_recovery

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output format (summary with averages plus daily records) and the two parameter modes. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or data freshness limitations. For a read-only data retrieval tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and metrics, followed by parameter modes and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place; there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameters, output format, and usage. It does not detail the exact JSON structure of the return value, but that is acceptable without an output schema. It is mostly complete for a moderately simple tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the two mutually exclusive parameter modes (days vs. start/end) and provides a clear example of the date range usage. This helps the agent understand correct parameter combinations, going beyond the raw schema descriptions.

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 retrieves WHOOP recovery data, enumerates specific metrics (recovery score, HRV, resting heart rate, SpO2, skin temperature), and distinguishes from siblings like get_sleep and get_strain. It is a specific verb+resource with clear scope.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use this to answer questions about how recovered/rested the user is, now or in the past.' It also explains the two parameter modes (last N days vs. explicit range). While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, the sibling tool names are distinct enough, and the context is clear.

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