List saved Garmin workouts with their workout IDs to find a workout to modify or confirm one does not already exist before creating a workout.
Saved workouts in the user's Garmin library with their workout_id. Use it to find a workout to change, and to check one doesn't already exist before creating it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds only that results come from the user's saved library versus scheduled items, and that workout_id is included. It says nothing about pagination, ordering, or the default cap that would affect completeness of the result.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, purpose first, usage second, with no filler. Every clause carries information the agent needs to route correctly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary. However, for a tool explicitly recommended as an existence check, silence on the default limit of 20 is a material gap that could produce false negatives on large libraries. Otherwise adequate for a one-optional-param read tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The single `limit` parameter has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or that the list is truncated by default. An agent reading only the description would not realize the result set is capped at 20 and may wrongly conclude a workout does not exist.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
"Saved workouts in the user's Garmin library with their workout_id" names the resource and the key field returned, which is enough to separate it from garmin_upcoming_workouts (scheduled) and garmin_workout_get (single fetch). The listing verb is only implied by the noun phrase rather than stated, which keeps it short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives two concrete situations: find a workout to modify, and de-duplicate before creating. That is actionable context tied to the workflow of garmin_workout_update and garmin_workout_create. It stops short of naming a sibling alternative such as garmin_upcoming_workouts for the scheduled case, so no explicit when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.