Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ultrahuman_mcp

ultrahuman_mcp

by crixalis17
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_recovery_score

Determine if your body is ready for intense activity by retrieving your recovery score (0-100) and status classification (excellent, good, fair, poor).

Instructions

Get recovery metrics indicating physical recovery status. Returns recovery score (0-100) and status classification (excellent/good/fair/poor). Use this to determine if the body is ready for intense activity.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_recovery_score"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoDate in YYYY-MM-DD format. Defaults to today if not specified.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses the output format and intended use, but does not mention authentication, rate limits, or explicitly state that it is a safe read operation. The verb 'get' implies read-only, but more detail could be added.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the action, and contains no filler. Every sentence contributes value: what it does, what it returns, and when to use it.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description fully covers the purpose, return values, and usage context, making it self-sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema fully describes the 'date' parameter with defaults and format, achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add extra parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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 retrieves recovery metrics, specifically a score (0-100) and a status classification. This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on temperature, heart, sleep, activity, and general health metrics.

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 'Use this to determine if the body is ready for intense activity,' providing a clear use case. It does not mention alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5, but the context is unambiguous.

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