Vaultbeat MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Add to strength log

log_strength_append

Append exercises to an existing strength session without deleting prior entries. Log forgotten sets or add sets in installments while preserving logged data.

Instructions

Add exercises to a session WITHOUT touching what is already logged (agent write).

This tool cannot delete anything you did not send. Your exercises are appended to the day's existing session; an exercise whose name matches an existing one gets its sets appended to it. This is the right tool for "log the set I forgot" or for logging a session in installments while the owner is still in the gym — which is how strength data actually arrives.

Reach for log_strength_entry ONLY when you intend the supplied exercises to become the day's ENTIRE session and everything else to be deleted.

date is the LOCAL calendar day the session happened, "YYYY-MM-DD". exercises is [{"name": "卧推", "sets": [{"weightKg": 30, "reps": 8}, ...]}, ...].

This tool deliberately cannot set the session note: that field is replace-only, and a tool that promises to delete nothing must not carry an exception. Use log_strength_entry to change it.

The result is the same shape log_strength_entry returns. replaced_exercises is always [] here — that empty list is the receipt that this call deleted nothing. Encrypted end-to-end before it ever leaves this machine. Requires a bind made after the agent write path shipped; an older bind must re-pair via vaultbeat_start_binding then vaultbeat_poll_binding.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`exercises`	Yes

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

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses detailed behavioral guarantees: it cannot delete anything not sent, matching exercise names append their sets, it deliberately cannot set the session note, `replaced_exercises` is always an empty list as a no-deletion receipt, data is encrypted end-to-end, and it requires a bind made after the agent write path shipped. This is substantially more behavioral context than the annotations alone provide, and there is no contradiction.

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 section earns its place: core behavior, usage guidance, parameter semantics, exclusions, result receipt, and binding prerequisite. It is front-loaded with the most decision-critical information first, and the details are grouped so an agent can quickly extract what it needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is complete for a complex mutation tool with minimal input schema. It covers the operation semantics, the exact sibling distinction, parameter formats, the session-note limitation, return-shape behavior, security/encryption, and a concrete bind-version prerequisite for older sessions. Since an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail the full return structure.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by defining `date` as the local calendar day in YYYY-MM-DD format and `exercises` with a concrete example showing `name` and nested `sets` containing `weightKg` and `reps`. It also explains the matching rule by `name`, which is essential behavioral semantics for the main parameter.

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 description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Add exercises to a session WITHOUT touching what is already logged.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from `log_strength_entry`, explaining that this tool appends while the sibling replaces the day's session, so an agent can select it correctly without opening schemas.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description gives explicit when-to-use scenarios ('log the set I forgot', 'logging a session in installments') and an explicit when-not-to-use rule: reach for `log_strength_entry` only when the supplied exercises should become the ENTIRE session and everything else deleted. It also covers the session-note edge case and directs the agent to the correct sibling for that operation.

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