Retrieve an athlete's saved workout templates and folders from Intervals.icu to distinguish planned workouts from completed activities for training analysis.
The athlete's saved workout library and its folders.
These are workout templates, not completed sessions; use list_activities
for what was actually done.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It clarifies the resource is a template library organized in folders and that it excludes completed sessions. However, it does not describe read-only status, pagination, folder traversal behavior, or return format. Adequate but minimal for a zero-parameter list tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tightly written sentences with no redundancy. The core subject is front-loaded, and the clarifying contrast with list_activities immediately follows. Every word earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers what the resource is, what it is not, and how it relates to a sibling tool. Nothing essential for selecting or invoking this tool is missing given its simplicity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so per calibration rules the baseline is 4. There is nothing to document, and the description adds no parameter-specific information because none is needed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'The athlete's saved workout library and its folders.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from list_activities by clarifying these are templates, not completed sessions, making sibling differentiation clear.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It provides explicit guidance on when NOT to use this tool: 'use list_activities for what was actually done.' This tells the agent the deciding criterion (templates vs. completed sessions) and names the correct alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.