Exercise.com by Cotlet

Edit client food log in Exercise.com

exercise_com_edit_client_food_log

Read-onlyIdempotent

Edit client food log in the user's own Exercise.com account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Exercise.com step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Exercise.com Cloud Browser. Exercise.com's official API: Exercise.com has an official API as a paid add-on: "API access is an additional feature with variable pricing", quoted by your Account Representative for your intended usage (checked 11 Nov 2026).

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": "exercise_com_edit_client_food_log"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and non-destructive behavior, and the description corroborates this by stating it 'opens nothing by itself' and yields procedural instructions instead of a mutation. The note that Exercise.com's official API is a paid add-on explains why browser automation is required, which is genuinely useful context beyond structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The operational content is front-loaded in two sentences, but the trailing paragraph quoting variable API pricing with a 'checked 11 Nov 2026' date is tangential padding that does not help an agent invoke the tool. The core guidance is efficient; the add-on pricing quote dilutes it.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: what is returned (screens, buttons, fields), that nothing is executed, and which tools carry out the actual edit. It stops short of describing the response format, but that is minor for a zero-input guidance tool.

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 schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and there is no parameter meaning the description needs to compensate for. Nothing in the description misrepresents or expands the empty input contract.

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 resource (client food log) and, crucially, corrects the impression given by the name: it returns step-by-step instructions rather than editing anything. An agent can tell this is a how-to/guidance tool, though it never names a sibling tool as the alternative.

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 states the workflow clearly: call this to get the Exercise.com screens/buttons/fields, then perform the action with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Cloud Browser. It does not give explicit when-not-to-use conditions or point to other sibling tools for related food-log tasks.

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

All Exercise.com 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?