garmin-connect-api

Create endurance workout

create_endurance_workout

Build running, cycling, or pool swim workouts with timed, distance, or lap-button steps and targets, then optionally schedule them on Garmin Connect.

Instructions

Create a run, ride or pool swim workout to follow on the watch.

Steps end on a time, a distance or the lap button, and can repeat. Runs and rides take a target: pace per km or mile, speed, heart-rate zone or range, power zone or watts, or cadence. Swims take a stroke, equipment and a pool length; distances must be whole lengths. Give schedule_date to put it on the calendar too; the reply then carries the schedule_id, and if scheduling fails the error gives the new workout's id. For strength workouts use create_strength_workout.

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": {
      "sport": "<sport>",
      "name": "<name>",
      "steps": "<steps>"
    },
    "name": "create_endurance_workout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	The workout's title.
`sport`	Yes	running, cycling, or swimming in a pool.
`steps`	Yes	Steps in order; a repeat holds steps to run several times.
`pool_unit`	No	The pool length's unit, m or yd; swims only.	m
`description`	No	Notes shown with the workout.
`pool_length`	No	Swims only.
`schedule_date`	No	If set, the workout is scheduled on this date after creation.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`raw`	No
`name`	No
`sport`	No
`updated`	No
`workout_id`	Yes
`description`	No
`schedule_id`	No	Set when the workout was just scheduled: what unschedule_workout takes.
`scheduled_on`	No	Set when the workout was just scheduled: its calendar day.
`estimated_duration_s`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the write profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real value: the failure mode where scheduling fails but the error carries the new workout's id, and the reply carrying schedule_id. It does not mention auth requirements or rate limits, but the disclosed side-effect semantics go beyond the annotations.

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 the paragraph stays on topic; step structure, targets, swim rules and scheduling each get one sentence. The target enumeration partly restates schema field names, which is the only mild redundancy.

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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, and it covers everything else an agent needs: sport-to-target mapping, step termination modes, repeat support, swim specifics, and the scheduling side effect. Nothing material for correct invocation is left implicit.

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 the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by adding cross-field semantics the schema does not encode — which sports accept which target types (pace/speed/HR/power/cadence for runs and rides, stroke/equipment/pool length for swims) and the constraint that swim distances must be whole lengths.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a run, ride or pool swim workout") and immediately names the sibling it is not ("For strength workouts use create_strength_workout"). An agent can distinguish it from create_strength_workout and the generic create_workout_from_dto without opening the schema.

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?

Explicit routing rule for strength workouts, plus a clear signal for when to pass schedule_date and what that implies. It does not address other plausible siblings (schedule_workout, create_workout_from_dto, list_workouts), so it is clear context without full exclusions.

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