Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
garmin-mcp

garmin-mcp

by Sinfjell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_personal_records

Retrieve Garmin running personal records, including fastest 1km/1mile/5km/10km times and longest run, with raw type/value data for unmapped records.

Instructions

Get the user's Garmin personal records (running PBs and bests).

Returns a JSON array, one object per record: record (human label for the common running types — fastest 1km/1mile/5km/10km, longest run — or null for other/unmapped types), type_id (Garmin's raw record type), value (raw: seconds for time records, metres for distance), value_formatted (clock string or "X.XX km" for mapped running types, else null), activity_id, and date. The raw type_id and value are always kept so an unmapped or non-running record is still usable, just unlabeled.

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_personal_records"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real behavioral traits: that unmapped or non-running record types yield a null `record` label while the raw `type_id` and `value` are always preserved, and that values are in seconds or metres. It does not mention read-only safety explicitly, auth requirements, or any limits on result size, but 'Get' makes the read-only nature unambiguous.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a structured field-by-field breakdown of the payload. It is slightly verbose in re-explaining return fields, and the trailing 'always kept so an unmapped record is still usable' sentence restates the null-handling point, but nothing is wasted outright.

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 zero-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description supplies enough to call and interpret it: what is returned, how units are encoded, and how to fall back on raw fields. Minor omissions such as auth prerequisites or whether records cover all activity types are not blocking.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters and the description correctly spends no words on inputs. The only semantic detail needed (units: seconds for time records, metres for distance) is provided and belongs to output interpretation rather than parameters.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get the user's Garmin personal records') and scopes it with the parenthetical '(running PBs and bests)', which clearly distinguishes this from siblings like get_performance_metrics or get_threshold_history. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Nothing tells the agent to prefer get_personal_records over get_performance_metrics or get_threshold_history when looking for best-effort data, and no prerequisites (authentication, Garmin account linkage) are stated.

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