coros-training-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Replace Scheduled Workout

replace_scheduled_workout

Replace an existing scheduled workout by cloning a library workout, applying step edits, scheduling the new entry, and removing the original scheduled entry.

Instructions

Replace a scheduled workout by cloning the library workout, applying edits, scheduling the replacement, and removing the old scheduled entry.

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": {
      "plan_id": "<plan_id>",
      "id_in_plan": "<id_in_plan>",
      "happen_day": "<happen_day>"
    },
    "name": "replace_scheduled_workout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Optional replacement workout name.
`plan_id`	Yes	Existing scheduled plan ID from list_scheduled_workouts.
`sort_no`	No	Order in the schedule for the replacement workout.
`happen_day`	Yes	Day to schedule the replacement workout on, in YYYYMMDD format.
`id_in_plan`	Yes	Existing scheduled entity ID from list_scheduled_workouts.
`workout_id`	No	Existing library workout ID.
`step_updates`	No	Same step patch format as update_workout.
`plan_program_id`	No	Fallback program ID when workout_id is not known.
`estimated_time_seconds`	No	Optional replacement top-level time in seconds.
`delete_original_workout`	No	Whether to delete the original library workout after replacement.
`estimated_distance_meters`	No	Optional replacement top-level distance in meters.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.1Oct 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does a good job disclosing the multi-step operation: clone, edit, schedule replacement, and remove the old scheduled entry. It surfaces the important destructive action (removing the old entry), though it does not discuss atomicity, failure behavior, or permission requirements.

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 a single dense sentence with no wasted words. The replacement action and its sequence are front-loaded, making the key behavior immediately clear.

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?

This is a complex mutation tool with 11 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema. The description explains the essential workflow and the removal of the old scheduled entry, which is the main behavioral risk. It could say more about edge cases or the delete_original_workout side effect, but it is largely complete for correct invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 11 parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds a high-level process explanation but no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: replacing a scheduled workout. It also clarifies the mechanism by naming cloning, editing, rescheduling, and removal, which makes the operation distinct from simple scheduling or removal tools. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like move_scheduled_workout or schedule_workout.

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?

The usage context is implied: this is for replacing an existing scheduled workout rather than merely moving or removing one. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over remove_scheduled_workout plus schedule_workout, or update_workout, so the agent must infer the right alternative.

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