Schedule an existing workout onto the calendar. date must be YYYY-MM-DD (or ISO-8601 date prefix). Returns Garmin schedule response as raw_data.
Bulk support: accepts workout_ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | ||
| account | No | ||
| workout_id | Yes | ||
| workout_ids | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description lacks details about behavioral traits beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description does not explain potential side effects, required permissions, or error conditions. The mention of 'raw_data' response is minimal transparency.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose and date format. No unnecessary words or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the presence of multiple sibling tools and the lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify error handling, prerequisites (e.g., workout must exist), or the structure of the response. The bulk support mention is helpful but leaves many questions unanswered.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for date (format) and workout_ids (bulk support), but does not describe account or workout_id beyond their names. Overall, it provides partial but not complete parameter semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (schedule an existing workout onto the calendar) and specifies the date format. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like garmin_submit_workout, though the action of scheduling vs submitting is reasonably clear.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides a format guideline for the date parameter and mentions bulk support for workout_ids, but it does not give guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use garmin_schedule_workout vs garmin_unschedule_workout or garmin_submit_workout.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool has a clearly distinct purpose. The Garmin-specific tools each handle a unique operation on workouts or accounts, and the platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, etc.) are separate and easily distinguishable.
The naming is inconsistent: Garmin tools use a consistent 'garmin_verb_noun' pattern, but the platform tools (authenticate, connect, marketplace, report_bug, show_version, toolkit_info) lack any prefix or pattern, creating a mismatch.
With 16 tools, the count is slightly above the typical sweet spot but still justified. The domain of workout management requires several operations, and the platform utilities are essential for the server's operation within the MCP ecosystem.
The Garmin workout tools cover the full lifecycle: create, retrieve, update, delete, plus scheduling. Listing accounts and the platform utilities round out the surface. Minor gaps (e.g., no tool to fetch activities) are acceptable given the server's focus on 'treinos' (workouts).