Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Trainzilla Coach MCP

by io.github.Trainzilla
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

invite_offline_clients

Email an app invitation to offline clients (confirm-gated: previews until confirm: true; it sends real emails). With no clientIds it invites every offline client who has an email on record and no waiting invitation; pass clientIds to invite only those. Clients with no email are reported, not guessed at (the coach invites them from their card with a WhatsApp link). When a client accepts, their plans, history, notes and invoices move to their own account. Coach Pro only.

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": "invite_offline_clients"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
confirmNoMust be true to actually execute. If false/omitted, returns a preview only.
clientIdsNoOnly these offline clients (ids from list_clients). Omit to invite everyone with an email.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint=false; the description carries the rest of the burden well. It discloses that this sends real emails, that it is confirm-gated to a preview by default, that it deduplicates against waiting invitations, and the downstream effect on client data (plans, history, notes and invoices move to their own account). Missing only batch/rate behavior for the 200-id cap, which the schema already implies.

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 confirm gate and the real-email warning are front-loaded in the first sentence, then eligibility, then the accept-time data move. No sentence is filler, and the parenthetical about WhatsApp is the only borderline detail but it usefully explains why no-email clients are skipped.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, yet the description still states what happens with un-invitable clients ('reported, not guessed at') and what a preview call returns. For a two-parameter, zero-required mutation with a real side effect, an agent has everything needed to call it safely.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the description must earn more. It does: the omit-versus-pass semantics of clientIds and the eligibility filter ('has an email on record and no waiting invitation') are policy details not present in the schema's terse parameter text.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Email an app invitation to offline clients') plus the channel (email) and audience (offline clients), which separates it from the broader send_invitation / bulk_invite_clients family. It stops short of naming a sibling tool explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary rather than read it.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit conditional routing: omit clientIds to invite every eligible offline client, pass clientIds to target a subset, and confirm:true is required or the call is only a preview. It also names the prerequisite ('Coach Pro only') and an exclusion case (clients with no email are reported, not guessed at), leaving nothing to inference.

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 toolsInspect
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