garmin-mcp

get_steps_and_calories

Get daily step count, distance, calories, floors, and intensity minutes for a specific date to track your activity and progress.

Instructions

Daily step total, distance, calories, floors, and intensity minutes.

Args: date: Calendar date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today.

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": "get_steps_and_calories"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`date`	Yes
`step_goal`	No
`total_steps`	No
`bmr_calories`	No
`floors_climbed`	No
`total_calories`	No
`active_calories`	No
`total_distance_meters`	No
`moderate_intensity_minutes`	No
`vigorous_intensity_minutes`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden. It fails to mention that this is a read-only operation, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or potential gaps in data (e.g., missing values if device not worn). Merely stating 'daily...' is insufficient.

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?

The description is short and direct, listing metrics first then parameter details. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points), but every sentence earns its place.

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 explaining return values is not required. The description covers the tool's primary purpose and the single parameter. Minor missing context like user scope or temporal range are not critical for this simple data retrieval tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains the sole parameter: format ('YYYY-MM-DD'), meaning (calendar date), and default (today). This adds significant value beyond the schema's empty definition.

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 explicitly lists the metrics returned: daily step total, distance, calories, floors, and intensity minutes. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_sleep or get_resting_heart_rate, which cover different health metrics.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_recent_activities for overall activity). The description does not specify context like data availability or prerequisites.

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

Deploy Server