Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
garminconnect-js

garminconnect-js

by DynamicsNinja
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

upload_activity

Uploads a local .fit, .gpx, or .tcx activity file to Garmin Connect using the plain device-sync upload path.

Instructions

Uploads an activity file through Garmin's plain device-sync upload path. Multipart upload to the PLAIN /upload-service/upload path, no extension suffix and none of importActivity's load-bearing import headers (ordinary device-sync-shaped upload, distinct from importActivity's spoofed-client import).

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": {
      "filePath": "<filePath>"
    },
    "name": "upload_activity"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filePathYesAbsolute path to a local .fit, .gpx or .tcx file (~ is expanded)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish this is a non-read-only, open-world write, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds the plain upload path and that no import headers are used, but says nothing about success behavior (e.g., that it creates an activity), duplicate handling, or authentication needs beyond what annotations give.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the action in the first sentence and tightly scoped overall. The parenthetical '(ordinary device-sync-shaped upload, distinct from importActivity's spoofed-client import)' partly restates the preceding clause, so there is mild redundancy and dense jargon.

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 single-parameter upload tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: it explains the mechanism and sibling distinction. It stops short of describing post-upload effects (whether it produces a new activity record), which would fully close the loop.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Single parameter with 100% schema coverage and a self-documenting filePath (absolute path, .fit/.gpx/.tcx, ~ expansion), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is the correct baseline of 3 when coverage is high.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource (uploads an activity file) and pins the exact mechanism and endpoint, explicitly distinguishing itself from the sibling import_activity/importActivity. An agent can tell what this does and how it differs from the nearest alternative without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Names the alternative (importActivity) and its defining condition (device-sync-shaped upload vs spoofed-client import), giving a clear basis for selection. However, it frames the choice in implementation/path terms rather than stating explicit when-to-use/when-not scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., auth, supported file states).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools