Reps

get_routines

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks about their saved routines ("show me my Push routine") or before changing one. Returns routines in any plan or none, each with its exercises (default_sets, the first working set's target_reps or target_duration_seconds and target_weight_kg, notes) and in_plans (plans using it, with day_of_week). Filter by routine_id or a name search, or omit both for all. Each routine carries updated_at: pass it as base_updated_at to edit_routine, which refuses the edit if the routine changed in the Reps app after you read it.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`search`	No
`routine_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`routines`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 20, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / routines / items / properties / exercises / items / properties / target_duration_seconds
```
Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / routines / items / properties / exercises / items / properties / target_reps
```
Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / routines / items / properties / exercises / items / properties / target_weight_kg
```
Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ]
+}
```
First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/no-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes well beyond that: it discloses the filtering semantics (routine_id, name search, or both omitted), per-routine updated_at, and a concurrency contract (pass base_updated_at to edit_routine, which refuses stale edits) — real behavioral context annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the usage trigger and tightly packed with no filler, but it also enumerates return fields (default_sets, target_reps, in_plans, day_of_week) that the output schema already provides, adding some redundancy to an already dense description.

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?

Given an output schema exists, return values need not be re-described, yet the description does so; the limit parameter and pagination behavior are the only genuine gaps. The update-token workflow is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It meaningfully explains routine_id, that search matches by name, and that omitting both returns all — but limit is never addressed, leaving one of three parameters unexplained in both schema and description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (retrieve saved routines) and distinguishes itself from siblings by tying directly into the edit_routine workflow. An agent can tell this apart from get_training_plan or get_workout_history from the description alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit triggers ('when the user asks about their saved routines', 'before changing one') and names the follow-up tool (edit_routine) with the condition that selects it. Nothing about when to call this vs alternatives is left to inference.

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

All Reps tools Inspect

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

Need Help?