Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Garmin MCP Server

Garmin MCP Server

by Tavaresiqueira
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Garmin workload guard

garmin_workload_guard

Check Garmin recovery metrics before committing to a workload, and receive a suggested daily scope when signals indicate low readiness.

Instructions

Check Garmin recovery metrics before committing to a workload and suggest a safer daily scope when signals are weak.

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": {
      "workload": "<workload>"
    },
    "name": "garmin_workload_guard"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workloadYesThe work the user wants to take on.
ticketCountNoNumber of tickets/tasks being considered.
dateNoDate in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool checks recovery metrics and suggests a safer scope, implying read-only behavior, but does not disclose specific metrics, side effects, or authorization needs. More detail on the suggestion mechanism would improve transparency.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and purpose. Every word contributes meaning; no redundancy.

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?

While the description covers purpose and usage, it lacks detail on what recovery metrics are used, how the safer scope is determined, and what the tool returns. With no output schema, the description should hint at the output format.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds little beyond the schema—'workload' as the work to take on, 'ticketCount' as number of tasks, 'date' as YYYY-MM-DD. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool checks Garmin recovery metrics before committing to a workload and suggests a safer daily scope when signals are weak. This distinguishes it from siblings like garmin_sleep_summary and garmin_wellbeing_snapshot by focusing on workload readiness.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly says 'before committing to a workload,' indicating when to use. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, though the context of siblings implies differentiation.

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