Bodywise Fitness Coach

Genetic muscular potential calculator

genetic_muscular_potential

Read-onlyIdempotent

Estimate a natural lean-mass ceiling from height, wrist and ankle (Casey Butt), compared with FFMI 25 (Kouri) and Berkhan, plus progress so far and maximum measurements.

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": {
      "height_cm": "<height_cm>",
      "wrist_cm": "<wrist_cm>",
      "ankle_cm": "<ankle_cm>",
      "weight_kg": "<weight_kg>",
      "body_fat_percent": "<body_fat_percent>"
    },
    "name": "genetic_muscular_potential"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ankle_cm`	Yes	Ankle at the smallest point, cm.
`wrist_cm`	Yes	Wrist at the smallest point, cm.
`height_cm`	Yes	Height in cm.
`weight_kg`	Yes	Current bodyweight in kg.
`training_years`	No	Years of consistent training so far.
`body_fat_percent`	Yes	Current body fat percentage.
`target_body_fat_percent`	No	Body fat % to compare at.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are a multi-formula comparison plus 'progress so far and maximum measurements', which is useful context, but it leaves those outputs vague and says nothing about accuracy caveats or units.

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?

A single dense sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the core action and the required measurements. It is slightly over-packed — formula names and the trailing 'progress so far and maximum measurements' clause are ambiguous on first read.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With seven parameters, five required, and no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining results but only hints at them ('progress so far', 'maximum measurements'). It is adequate to identify the tool but not complete enough to tell an agent what the response actually contains.

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%, with ranges and defaults for all seven parameters, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only echoes height, wrist and ankle and gestures at weight/body-fat via 'progress so far', adding no syntax or interpretation guidance beyond what the schema already provides.

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 — estimating a natural lean-mass ceiling — and names the concrete methodologies (Casey Butt, Kouri FFMI 25, Berkhan) plus the required inputs (height, wrist, ankle). This is far more specific than a sibling like fat_free_mass_index, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with that tool, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the tool for estimating genetic potential once the user has limb measurements. There is no statement of when to prefer it over fat_free_mass_index, fat_calculator, or strength_to_bodyweight_calculator, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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

All Bodywise Fitness Coach 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?