Running Companion MCP Server

This server has been deprecated

Personal project, not offered for public use.

Insights

get_insights

Read-only

Retrieve daily health signals and personal patterns from two years of data—warnings, watch items, positives, and effect sizes with caveats—to interpret recovery and training load.

Instructions

Signals for a day (warnings such as possible illness, overreaching, load spikes; watch items such as easy-run drift, sleep debt, irregular bedtimes, stress streaks; positives) and the user's personal patterns: comparisons from two years of their own data (late bedtimes, short nights, hard sessions, stressful days, evening runs, running after short nights or in heat), each with sample sizes, p-values (p raw, q adjusted for the number of comparisons: q decides what counts as an effect), effect size d and a caveat. Patterns are associations, not proof of cause; say so. Pass a date (defaults to the latest day with data).

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": "get_insights"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No
`include_patterns`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.3Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, it discloses the two-year analysis window, the statistics returned (sample sizes, raw p, q adjusted for multiple comparisons, effect size d, caveats), which statistic governs significance, and an explicit interpretive constraint that patterns are associations and should be reported as such. That is substantial behavior an agent could not infer from the schema.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The content is front-loaded and nearly every clause carries information, but the first sentence is a long nested parenthetical stack that is hard to parse on one read, and the closing statistical caveat could be tightened without losing meaning.

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 no output schema, the description does the heavy lifting of describing the return shape (signal categories, per-pattern statistics) and interpretation guidance, which is appropriate for this complexity. The remaining gap is the undocumented `include_patterns` flag, which an agent must guess at.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It does explain `date` (format implied by usage, defaults to the latest day with data) but never mentions `include_patterns`, leaving one of two parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 a specific resource and its contents in detail: day-level signals (warnings, watch items, positives) plus personal-pattern comparisons from two years of the user's data. It is far more specific than the name 'get_insights' alone, though it never contrasts itself with near siblings like get_today or get_trend.

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 rather than stated: the description conveys 'here is your daily signal summary plus statistical patterns' and notes that the date defaults to the latest day with data. It does not say when to prefer this over get_today, get_weekly_summary or get_trend, nor when to turn patterns off.

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

Deploy Server