Trainzilla Coach MCP

get_client_personal_bests

Read-only

Best weight and estimated 1RM per exercise for a client, most recent PR first.

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": {
      "clientId": "<clientId>"
    },
    "name": "get_client_personal_bests"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`clientId`	Yes	Client's User _id (from list_clients)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing the returned metrics (best weight, estimated 1RM) and sort order (most recent PR first). It does not mention pagination behavior or how limit affects results.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single efficient sentence with the core output and ordering front-loaded. It contains no redundant or filler text.

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 simple read-only tool with one required identifier and no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned and how results are ordered. The main gap is the unexplained limit parameter and lack of routing guidance among related tools.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 50%: clientId is documented in the schema as coming from list_clients, but limit is undocumented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning and does not explain what limit controls or how it interacts with the 'most recent PR first' ordering.

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 clearly states the returned resource: best weight and estimated 1RM per exercise for a client, ordered by most recent PR. This is specific enough to distinguish it from general progress or workout-log tools, though it does not explicitly name the closest sibling alternatives.

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 implied by 'for a client' and the PR-focused output, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus tools like get_client_progress, get_exercise_stats, or get_exercise_history. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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

All Trainzilla Coach MCP 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.