Gymdesk by Cotlet

View promotion readiness and progress in Gymdesk

gymdesk_view_promotion_readiness_and_progress

Read-onlyIdempotent

View promotion readiness and progress in the user's own Gymdesk account from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent. Returns how to do it in Gymdesk step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself; then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Gymdesk Cloud Browser. Gymdesk's official API: No publicly documented Gymdesk API was found on 11 Nov 2026: gymdesk.com/api, gymdesk.com/developers and docs.gymdesk.com/api returned 404 and the help center has no Gymdesk API article.

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": "gymdesk_view_promotion_readiness_and_progress"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds real context beyond that: it opens nothing itself, it returns a procedural walkthrough of screens/buttons/fields, and it notes the absence of a public Gymdesk API. The API-availability paragraph is background rather than behavior, but the side-effect disclosure is genuinely valuable.

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 core behavior is front-loaded, but the second sentence is a run-on that chains the output description, the no-side-effect note, and the browser handoff. The closing paragraph on 404s at gymdesk.com/api is a long aside that does little for an agent choosing how to call the tool.

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 input schema and no output schema, the description carries the burden and does state the return shape (step-by-step screens, buttons, fields). It doesn't say how much of the promotion-readiness picture is covered (which members/skills, thresholds), but for a procedural-guidance tool it is otherwise sufficient.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately spends no words re-explaining arguments and instead explains what the parameterless call yields.

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 first sentence names a specific resource (promotion readiness and progress) in the user's Gymdesk account, and the second clarifies that the tool returns step-by-step instructions rather than doing the work — a meaningful distinction an agent would not guess from the name alone. It stops short of contrasting with any of the many sibling gymdesk_* view/report tools.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It clearly defines the handoff: this tool produces instructions, then the agent should act with cotlet_browser_* tools in the Cloud Browser. That is useful next-step routing, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over related Gymdesk viewing tools, nor any stated preconditions for use.

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

All Gymdesk 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?