Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
garmin-mcp

garmin-mcp

by konstantintutsch
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_training_status

Read-only

Retrieves Garmin Connect training status for a specified date, helping track readiness, load, and performance trends.

Instructions

Return training status data for current user. (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_training_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cdateYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'read-only' is redundant. It adds useful context about the data source ('Garmin Connect') and date format, but does not disclose rate limits, authentication needs, or data freshness.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, front-loading the core purpose and then adding necessary context in parentheses.

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?

For a simple getter with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the essentials: what it returns, for whom, the source, and the date format. It could be improved with sibling differentiation, but that is a usage guideline gap rather than a completeness gap.

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 compensate. It adds the date format 'YYYY-MM-DD', which is helpful, but does not clarify what the parameter 'cdate' represents or that it is the date for which to fetch training status.

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 'training status data' with scope 'current user'. It is clear what the tool does, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_training_readiness or get_max_metrics, which also return training-related data.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools that also return training or fitness metrics. The only contextual hint is 'current user', but no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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