Vaultbeat MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Weight trend

get_weight_trend

Read-onlyIdempotent

Decrypt local body-weight records and compute trend: daily entries, weekly rate, averages, and goal distance. Includes coverage info for data history depth.

Instructions

Decrypt recent body-weight records locally and compute the trend.

Returns one entry per day (newest first, kilograms) plus latest/average/min/max, the OLS weekly rate (kg/week), and — when goal_kg is given — the distance to goal. Use owner prefix to filter by person — take it from vaultbeat_status (owner_user_id_prefix is the paired user; server 0.7.1+), or vaultbeat_doctor for every owner present in the data. Each record carries owner_user_id to identify whose data it is.

Carries a coverage block: quote coverage.days_covered (distinct days, not the row count) and coverage.span_days beside any average or trend, and read coverage.window_satisfied: false as a shorter history than asked, not as a missing kind. 🔴 Before saying how far back someone's data goes, read coverage.more_available: true means this server can decrypt days OLDER than first_day that your limit left behind — re-read with a larger limit, or quote coverage.oldest_available as the real start of their history. Never report a limit-shaped window as the extent of their data.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`fresh`	No
`limit`	No
`owner`	No
`goal_kg`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.8.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description goes far beyond that by disclosing local decryption, the `coverage` block's exact semantics, the meaning of `window_satisfied: false`, and the caveat that `more_available` may require a larger `limit`. This is rich behavioral context that annotations do not provide.

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 description is long but every sentence adds operational value. It is front-loaded with the tool's purpose, then returns, then parameter guidance, then the critical coverage warning in its own paragraph. The emphatic 'Never report a `limit`-shaped window...' sentence reinforces a high-stakes user-facing mistake without 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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not restate the full return shape, and it already covers owner sourcing, limit truncation, coverage semantics, and goal handling. The only material gap is `fresh`, which is optional but completely unexplained; otherwise an agent has nearly everything needed to call this correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description carries the burden, and it largely delivers: `owner` is sourced and explained, `limit` is tied to `first_day` and `coverage.more_available`, and `goal_kg` is connected to distance-to-goal output. However, `fresh` is never mentioned in the description, so one parameter remains semantically opaque.

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?

The opening sentence names a specific verb and resource: 'Decrypt recent body-weight records locally and compute the trend.' The rest of the description elaborates exact outputs (per-day entries, OLS weekly rate, distance to goal), making it obvious this is the weight-trend tool rather than one of the many sibling metric getters.

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?

The description gives clear operational guidance for when parameters are relevant, especially `owner` ('take it from `vaultbeat_status` ... or `vaultbeat_doctor`') and `goal_kg` ('when `goal_kg` is given'). It does not explicitly contrast this tool with siblings such as `get_metric_trend` or `list_metric_series`, so alternative/exclusion guidance is missing, but the context is otherwise clear.

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