What can you do with this server?

This MCP server enables authoring, compiling, and managing SuuntoPlus™ Guides (structured workouts) for Suunto watches. Key capabilities include: * Preview workouts (preview_workout): Compile and validate workouts without uploading. Detects unit conversions, truncated titles, and validation errors. Workouts can include step roles (warmup, work, rest, recovery, cooldown, other), durations (time, distance, manual lap), intensity targets (pace, speed, heart rate with % of max or LTHR, power with % FTP, cadence), nested repeats (up to 100 reps), per-step skip control (allowSkip), sports/activities, date, descriptions, and closing messages. Requires athlete profile data (max HR, threshold HR, FTP, rest HR, threshold pace) for percentage-based targets. * List workouts (list_workouts): Retrieve stored guides with optional pagination (limit, offset) and time filtering (since as epoch ms). * Describe the backend (describe_backend): Check whether the active backend is file, cloud, or private, and see which operations it supports. * Create, update, and delete workouts (require --allow-write and --allow-destructive flags respectively; tools are hidden if not permitted). * Multiple backends: File (default, generates local guide.zip), cloud API (needs subscription key and OAuth), and private mobile API (reuses suuntool session). * Safety tiers: Read-only by default; write and destructive actions are only available when explicitly enabled. Unauthorized tools are not listed. * Athlete profile support: Manage parameters needed for relative intensity targets (e.g., max HR, threshold HR, FTP, rest HR, threshold pace).

How do I use suunto-mcp?

1. Click on "Deploy Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@suunto-mcp compile my interval workout and preview how it will look on my Suunto" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

suunto-mcp

by adepssimius

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

suunto-mcp

An MCP server for authoring and managing structured workouts (SuuntoPlus™ Guides) on Suunto, designed so the transport can be swapped without touching the workout model.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by Suunto Oy.

Why it's built this way

There are three possible ways to get a structured workout onto a Suunto watch, and they differ enough that the transport has to be a replaceable part:

Path	Status	Notes
Cloud API (`cloudapi.suunto.com/v2/guides`)	Documented, needs a subscription key	The sanctioned path. Contract fully captured in docs/cloud-api.md.
Private mobile API (`suuntoplus/guides/*`)	Fully mapped and live-verified, reads and writes, unsanctioned	Confirmed by static analysis of the Suunto Android app, then exercised for real: create → duplicate-externalId 409 → update → delete, all against a live account. Full write-up in docs/private-guides-api.md. Genuinely undocumented; needs no new credential — reuses a `suuntool` session.
Local zip	Works today	Emit a validated `guide.zip`; no auth involved.

suuntool deliberately isn't one of these paths: it has no guide-creation capability at all. What it does have is a good, read-only MCP server of its own — suuntool mcp — for completed activity and wellness data, comments, reactions, and profile info. This server doesn't wrap or re-expose any of that: run the two side by side as separate MCP configs (claude mcp add suunto-mcp -- ... and claude mcp add suuntool -- suuntool mcp) rather than have this one duplicate a surface suuntool already covers better. The private backend's use of suuntool's session file (below) is credential reuse, not functionality overlap — it's the reason suuntool is a prerequisite for the private backend either way, so adding its own MCP server alongside this one costs nothing extra.

Its exit codes double as this server's own error taxonomy: codes 2–7 (USAGE/NETWORK/AUTH_EXPIRED/SERVER/NOT_FOUND/FORBIDDEN) are numerically identical on both, so a session that has expired in suuntool's own session.json surfaces through the same code as an expired Cloud API token.

Related MCP server: fitMCP

The interesting part

The guide format is a display format, not a training format. It has no step roles, no percentages, no nesting, and a 13-character title budget. So the domain model is what a coach would write, and src/compile lowers it:

roles (warmup/work/rest/…) → titles, notifications and lap marks
durations → a per-step trigger plus a matching countdown field
every duration/distance trigger grants lap-skip by default — a compound {type:"or", triggers:[base, {type:"manualLap"}]} plus createManualLap:true, confirmed live against a real Runna guide after a user reported this compiler's own workouts couldn't be skipped early. Opt a step out with allowSkip: false to lock it instead.
pace ranges → m/s, with the bounds inverted (4:15–4:25 /km is 3.77–3.92 m/s)
cadence → Hertz (180 spm is 3.0)
%HRmax / %FTP → absolutes, resolved from the athlete profile
nested repeats → flattened, keeping the outer block so the step budget survives
every string truncated and charset-sanitised for the watch display

Correctness is anchored on Suunto's own published sample guide, which is stored verbatim in test/fixtures/ and used two ways: to prove the format model accepts real Suunto output, and as the compiler's target.

Layout

src/domain/     workout model, guide wire format, validator, limits, activity IDs
src/compile/    the lowering compiler, unit conversions, externalId hashing
src/package/    zip packing (manifest.json + guide.json + icon.png)
src/backends/   the GuideBackend port and its implementations
src/mcp/        MCP server
scripts/        APK acquisition and static analysis for the RE track
docs/           captured API contracts and RE findings

Running it

Tool tiers follow suuntool's: read-only by default, --allow-write to create and update, --allow-destructive on top of that to delete. Gating happens at registration, so a tool you have not permitted is absent from the listing entirely rather than present and always refusing.

claude mcp add --scope user suunto-mcp -e SUUNTO_MCP_BACKEND=private -- node /path/to/suunto-mcp/dist/mcp/main.js --allow-write

Tier	Tools
read	`preview_workout`, `list_workouts`, `describe_backend`
`--allow-write`	`create_workout`, `update_workout`
`--allow-destructive`	`delete_workout`

preview_workout compiles and validates without uploading, and returns the warnings — start there.

For completed-activity and recovery data, add suuntool's own MCP server as a separate config rather than expecting this one to cover it:

claude mcp add --scope user suuntool -- suuntool mcp

Configuration

Variable	Purpose
`SUUNTO_MCP_BACKEND`	`file` (default), `cloud`, or `private` (reuses a `suuntool` session; see the warning above)
`SUUNTO_MCP_OUTPUT_DIR`	Where the file backend writes; defaults under `~/.local/share`
`SUUNTO_OWNER`	Creator name. Must match the OAuth app name for the Cloud API
`SUUNTO_SUBSCRIPTION_KEY`	`Ocp-Apim-Subscription-Key`, required for `cloud`
`SUUNTO_ACCESS_TOKEN`	Static bearer token, for trying the API by hand
`SUUNTO_CLIENT_ID` / `SUUNTO_CLIENT_SECRET`	Enables refresh of the 24h token
`SUUNTO_MAX_HR`, `SUUNTO_THRESHOLD_HR`, `SUUNTO_FTP`, `SUUNTO_REST_HR`	Athlete profile, needed only for `%HRmax` / `%FTP` targets

Configuration is validated at startup and a bad config is a hard exit — an MCP server that starts and then fails every call is much harder to diagnose.

Development

pnpm install
pnpm test
pnpm typecheck

Reverse-engineering track

scripts/pull-apk.sh        # pull the APK off a connected Android device
scripts/analyze-apk.sh     # stage 1: fast dex string scan
scripts/analyze-apk.sh 2   # stage 2: full jadx decompile, only if needed

apk/ and capture/ are git-ignored and must stay that way — captures contain session keys and account identifiers.

Available Tools

3 tools

describe_backendDescribe the active backendA

Read-only

Report which backend is active and which operations it supports. Check this before planning a sequence of changes — backends differ in what they can do.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No parameters

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict this. The description adds the context that backends differ in capability, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as output format or performance characteristics. With read-only status already declared, the added value is modest, so a 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded with the core function, and the second sentence provides actionable usage advice. No redundancy or fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter, read-only introspection tool, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. It explains the output at a high level (active backend and supported operations) and does not need an output schema.

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 has zero parameters, so the description carries no parameter burden. Per the rubric, the baseline is 4, and the description meets that baseline by not omitting anything required.

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 uses the specific verb 'report' with the resource 'active backend' and 'which operations it supports', clearly distinguishing it from the workout-related sibling tools. The title reinforces the same.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly instructs to 'Check this before planning a sequence of changes', providing clear timing guidance. It also mentions that 'backends differ' which explains why checking is necessary. No alternatives are named, but none are needed given the tool's unique introspection role.

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

list_workoutsList guidesB

Read-only

List structured workouts stored on the configured backend.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No
`since`	No	Epoch ms; only guides modified at or after
`offset`	No

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, so the bar for additional transparency is lower. The description adds 'stored on the configured backend' but does not disclose pagination behavior, default limits, ordering, or whether the list is comprehensive.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No wasted words or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and a paginated list operation (limit/offset/since), the description is too sparse. It does not mention return format, whether results are ordered, or how pagination works, leaving the agent guessing about the actual invocation behavior.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only 'since' is described). The tool description adds no explanation for limit, offset, or since. It fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, leaving agents uncertain about how parameters affect results.

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 a specific action ('List') and resource ('structured workouts') plus context ('configured backend'). It distinguishes from siblings: preview_workout implies a focused view of a single workout, and describe_backend is about backend metadata, whereas this tool returns a list.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus its alternatives. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or situations where preview_workout or describe_backend would be more appropriate.

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

preview_workoutPreview a workoutA

Read-only

Compile a structured workout into the SuuntoPlus guide format and return it WITHOUT uploading. Use this first: it surfaces unit conversions, truncated titles and validation errors, so mistakes are caught before anything reaches the watch.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`date`	No	yyyy-MM-dd. Pins the guide to a date in the Suunto calendar
`steps`	Yes	The session, in order
`title`	Yes	Guide name, max 60 chars
`profile`	No	Required only when the workout uses pctMax, pctLthr or pctFtp targets
`activities`	No	Sports this guide offers itself for. The first drives pace-vs-speed display
`externalId`	No	Stable id for idempotent re-pushes. Derived from the session when omitted
`description`	Yes	Shown in the Suunto app listing, max 256 chars
`finalMessage`	No	Closing screen shown when the session ends, max 13 chars
`shortDescription`	No	Shown on the watch itself, max 23 chars. Defaults to title

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description complements this by stating 'WITHOUT uploading' and detailing the types of errors it surfaces. This adds behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as the tool's side-effect-free nature and its focus on validation, without contradicting any annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core function, then a direct usage recommendation. No wasted words; ideal for a complex tool where the schema carries parameter details.

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?

Given the high schema complexity (nested steps, many optional fields) and no output schema, the description provides useful context about behavior (compilation, no upload, error surfacing). It doesn't describe the return value format, but the purpose and usage guidance are sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly, especially with the schema covering parameter semantics.

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%, meeting the high-coverage threshold, so a baseline of 3 applies. The description text does not need to add parameter-level meaning; it only mentions outputs like 'unit conversions' and 'truncated titles', which are consequences of parameter processing rather than direct parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Compile a structured workout into the SuuntoPlus guide format') and explicitly states it returns without uploading, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_workouts and describe_backend. The phrase 'Use this first' reinforces its unique role.

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?

Clear guidance is provided: 'Use this first' followed by what it surfaces (unit conversions, truncated titles, validation errors) and why (catch mistakes before they reach the watch). This implies it's a pre-upload validation step, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative upload tools or when not to use it.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

3 tool updatesv0.0.1Aug 4, 2026
- First observeddescribe_backend
- First observedlist_workouts
- First observedpreview_workout

Deploy Server

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Scored 2026-08-04 04:35 across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: preview_workout compiles and validates without uploading, list_workouts retrieves stored workouts, and describe_backend reports backend capabilities. There is no ambiguity or overlap between them.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: preview_workout, list_workouts, describe_backend. This is predictable and easy to navigate.

Tool Count4/5

With only 3 tools, the server is at the lower end of the ideal range, but each tool earns its place. The count feels slightly thin for a full workout management workflow, yet is appropriate for a focused validation and overview server.

Completeness2/5

The server lacks core operations such as create, update, delete, or upload for workouts. It only supports previewing and listing, with describe_backend to check capabilities, leaving significant gaps for any actual modification or synchronization workflow.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Related MCP Connectors

Coach WattsOAuth
com.coachwatts
Remote MCP server for training, nutrition, wellness, and performance data with OAuth 2.0.
Health & Wellness Fitness Tracking
271
Zooza MCP ServerOAuth
app.zooza
MCP server for Zooza — class scheduling, attendance, and booking for activity businesses.
Calendar Management App Automation
26
Withings Health DataOAuth
io.github.akutishevsky
MCP server for Withings health data — sleep, activity, heart, and body metrics.
Health & Wellness Research & Data
241
Inistate MCPOAuth
io.github.Inistate
MCP server for the Inistate platform: module discovery, entry management, and activity submission.
Content Management Systems Project Management
21

Related MCP Servers

coros-training-mcp
Health & Wellness Fitness Tracking Sports
dholliday3
A
license
Not graded
quality
C
maintenance
Running-first MCP server for COROS that allows authoring, editing, and scheduling running workouts, plus accessing sleep, HRV, training load, and activity exports.
Updated a month ago (2026-08-17 17:14 UTC)
MIT
fitMCP
Health & Wellness Fitness Tracking Data Platforms
gzarog
F
license
Not graded
quality
B
maintenance
A multi-platform fitness MCP server that syncs data from Garmin, Strava, Google Fit, and Suunto into a local DuckDB database and provides analytics tools via MCP.
Updated 2 months ago (2026-07-01 08:59 UTC)
1
-
garmin-coach-mcp
Fitness Tracking Health & Wellness
jhoy1020
A
license
A
quality
B
maintenance
MCP server for reading and querying Garmin Connect data, including activities, strength history, recovery, trends, and optionally creating workouts.
Updated a month ago (2026-08-02 18:01 UTC)
12
MIT
ClaudeCyclingMCP
Health & Wellness Fitness Tracking
elias-ramzi
A
license
A
quality
B
maintenance
An MCP server that converts structured cycling workout specs into MyWhoosh .zwo and Garmin Connect workout files, with tools for validation, description, and rendering. It also includes skills for uploading workouts to both platforms.
Updated 19 days ago (2026-08-25 09:00 UTC)
6
MIT