Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

APIVerve

by com.apiverve
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Exercises

Exercises
Read-only

Exercises: Exercises filters movements by target muscle group, equipment, and exercise name, returning matching exercises with their force type and required gear. Paid plans add step-by-step instructions, difficulty levels, and movement mechanics. (Cost: 2 credits)

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": {
      "muscle": "<muscle>"
    },
    "name": "Exercises"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoThe name of the exercise to get information about
muscleYesThe muscle group to get exercises for
equipmentNoThe equipment used for the exercise

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNo
errorNoError message, null on success
statusNo"ok" on success

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: results are tiered by plan, with instructions, difficulty, and movement mechanics gated behind paid plans, plus a 2-credit cost. It does not mention pagination or result limits, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Three tight sentences with no filler, and the filtering scope is front-loaded before the paid-tier caveat and cost. The redundant 'Exercises: Exercises filters' opening wastes a few words but the rest earns its place.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists and the description still usefully flags the free-vs-paid split in returned data, which an agent needs to interpret results. The remaining gap is the filter-combination and required-vs-optional semantics, which the schema does not resolve on its own.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in structured fields; the description only restates the muscle/equipment/name filter axes. It misses the chance to clarify that 'muscle' is the sole required parameter while name and equipment are optional, or whether filters combine as AND or OR.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: filters exercises by muscle group, equipment, and name, and names what is returned (force type, required gear). The purpose is unmistakable for an agent, though it never differentiates itself from the nearest sibling, Nutrition, which also covers fitness-adjacent data.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The word 'filters' implies a lookup use case, but the agent is left to infer when this tool beats Nutrition or any other fitness tool, and nothing says what to do when no filters match.

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

All APIVerve toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources