Record completed workout sessions including exercises, sets, reps, weights, and notes to build a detailed training log.
Log a workout session with exercises and sets
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Yes | Workout date (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| name | No | Session name (e.g., "Push Day") | |
| notes | No | Session notes | |
| exercises | Yes | Exercises performed | |
| energyLevel | No | Energy level 1-5 | |
| durationMinutes | No | Total duration in minutes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Log' implies a creation operation, but the description does not state that a new record is created, whether any existing data is modified, or what prerequisites exist (e.g., valid exerciseDefinitionId). It mostly restates the tool name's action.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single focused sentence with no redundant phrases. It front-loads the verb and object, and every word contributes to the meaning.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite rich schema descriptions, the tool has a complex nested exercises structure and no output schema. The description does not explain the effect of the operation, how to handle superset grouping, or what response to expect. With no annotations, these gaps make the description incomplete for a mutation tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with each property already well documented (date format, exerciseDefinitionId lookup, weight in kg, etc.). The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Log') and resource ('workout session'), and specifies the payload scope ('exercises and sets'). This clearly differentiates it from read-only siblings like list_workout_sessions and list_exercises.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies the tool is for recording a workout session but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it name any exclusions. The usage context is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.