Skip to main content
Glama
futureweb

Futureweb Intervals MCP

by futureweb
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

find_similar_intervals

Read-only

Find earlier activities with intervals matching a target length and % FTP intensity, or similar to a reference activity's main set, ranked by comparability.

Instructions

Use to find earlier activities with intervals of a given length and intensity (% of FTP), or like the main set of a reference activity, ranked by comparability.

Pass min/max_secs and min/max_intensity, or reference_activity_id (window from its main set: length ±25 %, intensity ±8 points of FTP; explicit values win; only the 365 days before it unless start_date is given). Returns per activity date, sport, interval summary, load, FTP at the time, gear, power meter, compliance and a comparability score 0-100 with reasons. Sport defaults to one family (other families are counted, "all" keeps every sport); watts of different power meters are not comparable, use % of FTP. Read-only; one API call (+2 with a reference, +1 gear catalog). Details: get_activity_intervals; same workout over time: compare_workouts. Method: intervals://methods/comparisons (get_guide).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum activities returned
targetNoWorkout target type (not the sport); omit for any
gear_idNoOnly activities on this gear id (get_gear_list)
sort_byNoDefault comparability with a reference, else date (newest first)
end_dateNoLast day YYYY-MM-DD; default no limit
max_repsNoMaximum matching repetitions per activity
max_secsNoLongest interval (s); required without reference_activity_id
min_repsNoMinimum matching repetitions per activity
min_secsNoShortest interval (s); required without reference_activity_id
ftp_rangeNoOnly activities with FTP at the time in "low-high" W, e.g. "225-240"
athlete_idNoDefault: the configured athlete
start_dateNoFirst day YYYY-MM-DD; default 365 days before the reference, else no limit
sport_typesNoComma-separated activity types or "all"; default the sport family of the reference or of most results
max_intensityNoHighest % of FTP, 0-300 (rounded up)
min_intensityNoLowest % of FTP, 0-300 (rounded down)
output_formatNojson = machine-readable, all fieldstext
ftp_tolerance_pctNoFTP difference in % to the reference or newest result flagged as other FTP context
reference_activity_idNoActivity whose main work set defines the search window and the ranking

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds a lot beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint: API call cost ('one API call, +2 with a reference, +1 gear catalog'), defaulting behavior for sport and date windows, and a genuine comparability caveat ('watts of different power meters are not comparable, use % of FTP'). The description even points to a method guide via get_guide.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and every sentence carries information, including return fields and the guide pointer. It is dense with nested parentheticals, which makes it slightly harder to scan, but given 18 parameters the length is largely earned.

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?

With no output schema, the description explicitly enumerates return fields (date, sport, interval summary, load, FTP at the time, gear, power meter, compliance, comparability score 0-100 with reasons), covering the gap. Defaults, cost, and alternatives are all present, so an agent needs nothing further to call it correctly.

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 100%, so 3 is the baseline, but the description adds real meaning: the derivation of the reference window (length ±25%, intensity ±8 points of FTP), the 365-day default lookback, and how sport_types defaults. It does not document every parameter, but the interaction semantics it covers are the ones an agent cannot infer from the schema alone.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'find earlier activities with intervals of a given length and intensity', and explicitly names the sibling it is not ('Details: get_activity_intervals; same workout over time: compare_workouts'). An agent can distinguish it from the other ~50 siblings without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

States the two mutually exclusive invocation modes ('Pass min/max_secs and min/max_intensity, or reference_activity_id') and the precedence rule ('explicit values win'). Also routes the agent to the right alternatives (get_activity_intervals for details, compare_workouts for the same workout over time).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools