Intervals.icu MCP Server

List calendar events

list_events

Read-only

Fetch training calendar events for an athlete within a date range, returning compact summaries by default and accepting a fields list to control detail.

Instructions

List events on the athlete's training calendar for a date range. Returns a compact summary of each event by default, omitting the structured-workout document; pass fields to change that.

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_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`fields`	No	Fields to return. Defaults to a compact 14-field summary; the full record has ~62 fields, many of them null. Pass ["*"] for everything.
`newest`	Yes	End date YYYY-MM-DD
`oldest`	Yes	Start date YYYY-MM-DD

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 16, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), yet the description adds genuinely useful behavior: the default response is a compact summary that omits the structured-workout document, and fields can change that. This non-obvious default would otherwise surprise an agent. It stops short of 5 because it says nothing about result ordering, result caps, or pagination for large ranges.

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 sentences, zero waste, and the core purpose plus the most surprising behavior (default compact projection) are both front-loaded. Nothing could be trimmed without losing information.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and the return-shape default, and annotations cover read-only safety. It is missing only operational detail such as pagination or whether very wide date ranges are truncated, which keeps it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, with fields, oldest, and newest all documented in the schema (including the compact 14-field default and the ["*"] escape hatch), so the schema carries the load. The description restates the fields behavior but adds no syntax or format detail beyond it, making the baseline 3 correct.

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 (List) and resource (events on the athlete's training calendar) scoped to a date range, which an agent can readily distinguish from the singular get_event sibling. It does not explicitly name a sibling or carve out what it is not, so it falls just 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.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the date-range framing suggests bulk retrieval versus get_event for a single event, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. No mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or limits on range size.

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