formtrace-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Update Hevy Workout

update_hevy_workout

Destructive

Preview or replace an entire recorded Hevy workout with complete fields and privacy settings; writes stay dry-run until explicitly enabled.

Instructions

Preview or replace a recorded workout. This is a full update, not a partial patch.

Supply all desired fields and an explicit privacy setting. Set dry_run=false to write; only execute a write when the user has requested it.

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": {
      "workout_id": "<workout_id>",
      "workout": "<workout>"
    },
    "name": "update_hevy_workout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dry_run`	No
`workout`	Yes
`workout_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

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?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the essential nuance that this is a full overwrite, not a partial patch, and that is_private must be supplied explicitly — both meaningful warnings beyond the structured fields. It does not state what happens to omitted fields or whether the operation is reversible.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler, and the most consequential fact (full update, not a patch) is front-loaded. The dry_run instruction is separated cleanly with a semicolon, making the preconditions easy to scan.

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 values need not be described, and the preview/write split plus full-replacement semantics cover the highest-risk behavior. However, for a tool with a three-level nested schema at 0% coverage, the description leaves the payload structure entirely unexplained, which is a notable gap an agent must resolve from the raw schema.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden, and it does not. It never explains workout_id, the required workout object, or the nested exercises/sets structure; 'supply all desired fields and an explicit privacy setting' is too vague given the deeply nested payload. Only the dry_run preview/write meaning is conveyed.

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 ('replace a recorded workout') and crucially clarifies the semantics as a full replacement rather than a patch. It does not explicitly name a sibling such as update_hevy_routine or create_hevy_workout, but the update-vs-replace framing is unambiguous enough for selection.

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?

It states the operational condition clearly: default is preview, and a write should only happen when the user has requested it by setting dry_run=false. That is real when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming alternative tools for related tasks (e.g., routines vs workouts), so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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