Intervals.icu MCP Server

List activities

list_activities

Read-only

Retrieve activities within a date range and get a compact summary by default, or specify fields to return exactly the data you need.

Instructions

List activities for a date range. Returns a compact summary of each activity by default; use fields to choose exactly what you need.

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": {
      "oldest": "<oldest>",
      "newest": "<newest>"
    },
    "name": "list_activities"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Maximum number of activities to return
`fields`	No	Fields to return. Defaults to a compact 30-field summary; the full record has ~184 fields, many of them null. Pass ["*"] for everything.
`newest`	Yes	End date in YYYY-MM-DD format (inclusive)
`oldest`	Yes	Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format (inclusive)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are a compact summary by default, but that same fact is already spelled out in the `fields` schema entry, so the added behavioral value is thin. Nothing about pagination or the `limit` ceiling of 500 is surfaced.

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?

Two tight sentences with the list/date-range scope front-loaded and no filler. The second sentence largely restates the `fields` schema description, which slightly dilutes its value.

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 list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, an agent has what it needs: scope, defaults, and how to expand the payload. Only pagination behavior and the relationship to search_activities are unaddressed.

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 100% and each parameter carries its own description, so the baseline is 3. The description points at `fields` but adds no syntax or default detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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+resource (list activities) with scope (for a date range), which cleanly separates it from get_activity, get_activity_streams, and other single-activity siblings. It does not explicitly name search_activities as the alternative, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

The date-range framing implies when this tool applies, and the hint about `fields` steers parameter choice, but there is no explicit when-to-use versus search_activities or the get_* siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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