Ciclos fisiológicos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It accurately describes a read-only listing operation with ordering, filtering, and pagination. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but these are common assumptions. The disclosure is honest and sufficient for safe use.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence explains what the tool does and what data it returns. The second covers ordering and filtering/pagination. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with key purpose.

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?

With no output schema, the description lists key returned fields (strain, calories, heart rate) and mentions ordering and pagination. It could be improved by noting response structure (e.g., each cycle object includes id, date), but for a list tool it is adequately 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds context by stating start/end are for date filtering and nextToken for pagination, but this is largely redundant with schema descriptions. Thus, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 days) with specific metrics (strain, calories, heart rate), orders by most recent, and supports filtering/pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_cycle_by_id (single cycle) and get_recoveries/get_sleeps (different metrics).

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 explicitly states to use start/end for date filtering and nextToken for pagination, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool (e.g., for a single cycle, use get_cycle_by_id) or provide alternatives, so it's not a full 5.

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