Skip to main content
Glama

analyze_workout

Analyze workout routines to identify muscle coverage, detect imbalances, and find gaps in exercise selection for balanced training.

Instructions

Analyze a workout for muscle coverage, gaps, and imbalances. Pass a list of exercise names or IDs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
exercisesYesList of exercise IDs or names

Implementation Reference

  • Registration of the 'analyze_workout' tool and its handler in src/tools.ts.
    server.tool(
      "analyze_workout",
      "Analyze a workout for muscle coverage, gaps, and imbalances. " +
        "Pass a list of exercise names or IDs.",
      {
        exercises: z
          .array(z.string())
          .min(1)
          .describe("List of exercise IDs or names"),
      },
      async ({ exercises }) => {
        try {
          const result = await client.analyzeWorkout(exercises);
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) }] };
        } catch (err) {
          return { content: [{ type: "text", text: formatError(err) }], isError: true };
        }
      },
    );
  • The actual implementation of the analyzeWorkout method that calls the API, used by the MCP tool.
    async analyzeWorkout(exercises: string[]): Promise<unknown> {
      return this.request("/api/v1/workouts/analyze", {
        method: "POST",
        body: JSON.stringify({ exercises }),
      });
    }
Behavior3/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully identifies the analytical dimensions (coverage, gaps, imbalances) but omits critical operational details such as whether results are cached, any rate limits, or whether the analysis is deterministic.

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 efficiently deliver the tool's purpose and input requirements with zero redundancy or filler content. The structure front-loads the value proposition (analysis for gaps/imbalances) before mentioning mechanics.

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?

For a single-parameter analytical tool, the description adequately covers the input intent but fails to compensate for the missing output schema. It does not describe the return format (structured data vs narrative) or analysis depth, leaving agents uncertain about result handling.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage ('List of exercise IDs or names'), the parameter is already well-documented. The description's 'Pass a list of exercise names or IDs' adds no new semantic information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 clearly specifies the analytical operation ('Analyze') and the exact dimensions evaluated (muscle coverage, gaps, imbalances), which distinguishes this from simple retrieval siblings like get_muscles_worked. However, it does not explicitly state that this tool analyzes a *collection* of exercises as a workout plan, leaving subtle ambiguity.

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?

While the second sentence ('Pass a list of exercise names or IDs') provides basic invocation syntax, there is no guidance on when to select this tool versus siblings like get_muscles_worked or find_exercises, nor any mention of prerequisites or constraints.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/csjoblom/musclesworked-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server