CoachingPortal by Cotlet

List coaches in CoachingPortal

coachingportal_list_coaches

Read-onlyIdempotent

List coaches in the user's own CoachingPortal account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in CoachingPortal step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's CoachingPortal Cloud Browser. CoachingPortal's official API: CoachingPortal publishes no public API.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "coachingportal_list_coaches"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false), the description adds genuinely useful behavior: the call performs no action itself ('opens nothing by itself'), returns procedural guidance rather than state, and CoachingPortal has no public API. This tells the agent exactly what side effects to expect and why a browser tool is needed next.

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?

The description is short and front-loads the resource and scope, then the return behavior, then the next step. The middle clause is slightly run-on ('Returns how to do it ... and opens nothing by itself; then do it with ...'), but no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a zero-parameter, annotation-rich tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns, that it is side-effect free, and how to continue the task with browser tools. Only the level of detail in the returned steps and any failure conditions (e.g., missing Cloud Browser session) are left implicit.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the schema coverage is 100% and the empty object schema matches the description's account-scoped, filter-free behavior.

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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('List coaches') plus scope ('the user's own CoachingPortal account'), which separates it from list_clients and other list_* siblings. It then discloses an unusual twist — the tool returns step-by-step instructions (screens, buttons, fields) rather than coach data — which is clear once stated, though an agent reading only the name could briefly expect a data list.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives explicit follow-up guidance: use the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's CoachingPortal Cloud Browser to actually perform the listing, and notes there is no public API alternative. It does not state when not to use this tool or what to do if the account/browser context is unavailable, but the workflow context is clear.

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

All CoachingPortal by Cotlet 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?