Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Bevel MCP

Bevel MCP

by JoshPopov
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Get Bevel workout routines and custom exercises

bevel_get_workout_data
Read-only

List strength routines and custom exercises, optionally including deleted items and two recent completed workouts in raw format to map their structure.

Instructions

Lists strength routines (exercises, sets, weights) and custom exercises. Deleted items are hidden. Completed workouts are listed by bevel_get_workout_history; cardio and exercise notes are only counted.

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": "bevel_get_workout_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
includeDeletedNo
includeSessionsNoAlso return the 2 most recent completed workouts as stored (raw), to help map their format.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds genuinely new behavior — soft-deleted items are filtered out and completed workouts live in a different tool. The clause "cardio and exercise notes are only counted" is vague and hard to act on, which keeps this from a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned before the exclusions. The final clause about cardio and notes is ambiguous filler that could be cut or rewritten, but overall there is little waste.

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 read-only, two-optional-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the returned shape (routines with exercises, sets, weights) and the sibling boundary. The only real shortfall is the undocumented includeDeleted parameter and the unclear cardio/notes remark.

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?

Schema coverage is 50%: includeSessions is documented in the schema, includeDeleted is not. The description partially compensates by stating "deleted items are hidden," which implies what includeDeleted toggles, but it never names the parameter or its default, leaving the gap only half-closed.

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?

"Lists strength routines (exercises, sets, weights) and custom exercises" names a specific verb and two concrete resources, and the second sentence explicitly separates it from bevel_get_workout_history. An agent can distinguish this from the sibling without inspecting 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?

It routes completed-workout queries to bevel_get_workout_history and states that deleted items are hidden by default, which is actionable context for choosing this tool. It does not give a positive 'use this when...' framing or mention the create/save routine siblings, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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