Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
garmin-mcp

garmin-mcp

by konstantintutsch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_spo2_data

Read-only

Retrieve available SpO2 data from Garmin Connect for a specified date in YYYY-MM-DD format. Use it to inspect blood oxygen readings without modifying your account.

Instructions

Return available SpO2 data 'cdate' format 'YYYY-MM-DD'. (Garmin Connect, read-only. Dates are YYYY-MM-DD.)

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": {
      "cdate": "<cdate>"
    },
    "name": "get_spo2_data"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cdateYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so 'read-only' merely restates them. The description adds nothing about what happens when no SpO2 data exists for a date, whether the result is intraday or a daily aggregate, or any lookback limits — modest value over structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Short, but wasteful: the YYYY-MM-DD format is stated twice and the 'cdate' phrasing is awkward rather than front-loaded. The scope statement should lead instead of being buried in parentheses.

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

Completeness3/5

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 needn't be explained, and the single required parameter has its format documented. Still missing is the granularity and range of the returned data — an agent cannot tell whether this is a daily rollup or a full intraday series.

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 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden; it does supply the required 'YYYY-MM-DD' format, which the schema lacks. However, it never explains what 'cdate' means (calendar date) or how time zones affect the queried day.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('SpO2 data'), which is distinguishable from the many sibling getters (heart rate, stress, respiration, HRV). The date-format remark muddies the sentence but the core intent is unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this versus the other daily-metric getters, no prerequisites, and no stated exclusions. The only context given is the source system (Garmin Connect), which doesn't help tool selection.

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