Withings MCP

Withings Data Inventory

withings_data_inventory

Read-onlyIdempotent

Map available Withings data domains, required auth scopes, privacy boundaries, and recommended initial calls to orient your agent before querying user data.

Instructions

Inventory supported Withings data domains, auth scope requirements, privacy boundary and recommended first calls. Does not call Withings APIs or expose user data.

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": "withings_data_inventory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`response_format`	No		markdown

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`auth`	No
`kind`	Yes
`links`	Yes
`notes`	Yes
`scopes`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`totals`	Yes
`mcp_name`	Yes
`categories`	Yes
`unofficial`	Yes
`first_tools`	Yes
`api_boundary`	No
`generated_at`	Yes
`privacy_modes`	Yes
`data_access_model`	Yes
`recommended_agent_flow`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.6Jun 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds that it does not call Withings APIs or expose user data, providing extra safety context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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: first states what it does, second clarifies what it does not. No wasted words. Front-loaded with action verb.

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 metadata inventory tool, description covers purpose, scope, and safety boundaries. Output format is presumably defined in the output schema, which is present but not shown. Complete for its intended simple use.

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?

Only one parameter (response_format) with enum and default. Schema has 0% description coverage, and tool description does not mention the parameter. However, the parameter is self-explanatory given its name and enum values.

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 verb 'inventory' clearly indicates this tool returns a list/metadata. It specifies exactly what is inventoried: supported data domains, auth scope requirements, privacy boundary, and recommended first calls. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that fetch actual user data or perform other actions.

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?

Description mentions 'recommended first calls', implying it should be used before data retrieval tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the context of being a metadata tool makes usage clear.

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