openGym MCP Bridge

fetch

Retrieve a single openGym section—plan, workouts, or summary—by its exact ID returned from search, with read-only access.

Instructions

Read-only fetch for one openGym section: plan, workouts or summary. Use an exact ID returned by search.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "fetch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.1Oct 27, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose read-only semantics, which is the key safety fact. It says nothing about behavior on missing/invalid sections, error shape, or what a fetched section contains, which matters for a tool with no output schema.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the read-only nature and the resource scope. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Adequate for a trivial one-param read tool, but the combination of a generic name, heavy sibling overlap, no annotations and no output schema leaves the agent guessing why this exists alongside get_plan and get_summary.

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 0%, but the single parameter is fully constrained by an enum, so the values are self-documenting. The description adds the provenance hint (ID comes from search), yet calling these section names "exact ID"s is slightly at odds with an enum of literal section names.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: a read-only fetch of one openGym section, with the three sections enumerated (plan, workouts, summary). It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as get_plan and get_summary, which appear to return the same sections.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"Use an exact ID returned by search" implies the intended workflow (search first, then fetch), which is real guidance. But it never says when to pick this generic fetch over get_plan / get_summary / get_recent_workouts, so the main selection decision is left unresolved.

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