formtrace-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Get Training Report

get_training_report

Read-only

Summarize training and recorded sets by muscle group for a date range, including the preceding equal-length period, and refresh Hevy data when needed.

Instructions

Summarize training and recorded sets by muscle group for inclusive YYYY-MM-DD dates.

Includes the preceding equal-length period. Secondary muscle involvement overlaps primary groups; do not add the counts together. Refresh requests fresh Hevy data.

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": {
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "get_training_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`refresh`	No
`end_date`	Yes
`timezone`	No	Europe/Warsaw
`start_date`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`period`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`current`	Yes
`previous`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes
`previous_period`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 10, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses two non-obvious behaviors: the result includes an equal-length preceding period, and secondary muscle counts overlap primary groups so they must not be summed. It also hints at caching semantics via 'Refresh requests fresh Hevy data', though it never states plainly whether results are cached by default.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, and every clause carries information (date format, window extension, overlap caveat, refresh). The refresh clause is telegraphic and could be stated more plainly, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is rightly omitted, and the aggregation caveat is well covered. The gap is the undocumented timezone parameter and the unstated default caching behavior, both of which affect how an agent should call this reporting tool.

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 0% across 4 parameters, so the description must compensate. It does add the YYYY-MM-DD format and inclusive semantics for start_date/end_date, and partially explains refresh, but the timezone parameter (default Europe/Warsaw) is never mentioned even though it materially shifts date bucketing.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Summarize training and recorded sets by muscle group' over a date range. That is enough to distinguish it from the workout/routine detail siblings, though it never names an alternative, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 implied by the required date range and the muscle-group aggregation, which signals an analytics/reporting use case rather than raw retrieval. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g. get_exercise_progression) to steer the agent.

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