Cronometer MCP

list_diary_groups

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the diary groups or meals configured in a Cronometer account, such as Breakfast and Lunch, to identify available meal categories for food logs.

Instructions

The diary groups (meals) this account uses, e.g. Breakfast, Lunch.

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": "list_diary_groups"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.1.0Nov 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scoping detail (results are per-account) and illustrative values, but says nothing about whether custom/user-created groups are included or how results are ordered.

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded; the '(meals)' gloss and the Breakfast/Lunch examples each do real disambiguation work rather than padding.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, annotations cover the safety profile, and there are no parameters. The definition is nearly complete; only the inclusion of custom groups and any ordering convention are left unstated.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond confirming that the listing is scoped to 'this account'.

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 states the specific resource returned (the account's diary groups) and disambiguates the domain jargon by equating 'diary groups' with 'meals', plus concrete examples (Breakfast, Lunch). It lacks an explicit verb and does not reference any sibling, but no sibling appears to list diary groups, so differentiation is less critical.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The parenthetical '(meals)' and 'this account uses' only weakly imply that this is the vocabulary lookup to call before creating meal-based entries.

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

Deploy Server