Garmin MCP for macOS

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

garmin_body_battery

Read-only

Retrieve Body Battery charge/drain points and observed sample min/max for inclusive dates, defaulting to last 7 days and allowing up to 90. Returns observed data without invented recovery scores.

Instructions

Body Battery charge/drain points and observed sample minimum/maximum. Inclusive dates, default last 7 days, maximum 90. No invented recovery score.

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": "garmin_body_battery"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`end`	No
`start`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully notes 'No invented recovery score', signaling raw observed samples rather than derived metrics, but says nothing about pagination, units, or auth.

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?

Terse and front-loaded, leading with the payload and following with range constraints. The fragmentary phrasing ('No invented recovery score') is slightly cryptic but earns its place by clarifying output nature.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

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 no explanation, and the date-window behavior is fully specified. The main residual gap is the expected date string format and what the charge/drain point units represent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% and the two date params carry no descriptions or format, so the description must compensate — and it does, explaining inclusivity, the 7-day default, and the 90-day cap. The actual date format (e.g. YYYY-MM-DD) remains unstated.

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?

Names the specific resource (Body Battery) and what is returned (charge/drain points plus observed sample min/max), which is more precise than the bare name. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling garmin_api_body_battery, leaving ambiguity between the two.

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?

Conveys range semantics (inclusive, default 7 days, max 90) that imply it is a date-windowed query tool. It never says when to prefer this over the near-identical garmin_api_body_battery sibling, so usage is only implied.

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