Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TrainingPeaks MCP

TrainingPeaks MCP

by lsantome
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

tp_get_workout

Fetch complete workout details by ID, including intervals and metrics, to analyze training after listing workouts.

Instructions

Get workout details by ID. Use after tp_get_workouts.

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": {
      "workout_id": "<workout_id>"
    },
    "name": "tp_get_workout"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
athleteNoTarget athlete name or ID (coach accounts only). Omit to use your own profile.
workout_idYesWorkout ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get workout details by ID' and adds no information about permissions, error behavior, return contents, or side effects. For a read operation, this is sparse but not misleading.

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?

The description is exactly two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and a useful sequence clue. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the absence of annotations and an output schema, the description leaves 'details' unspecified and does not explain what the response contains. However, for a simple get-by-ID tool with clear parameters, it is minimally viable but lacks richness.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters, with descriptions for 'athlete' and 'workout_id.' The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond saying to use it after listing workouts, which weakly implies where workout_id comes from.

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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get workout details by ID.' It clearly distinguishes from the sibling list tool 'tp_get_workouts' by emphasizing the ID parameter and even suggests a sequence, reinforcing the detail-vs-list distinction.

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?

'Use after tp_get_workouts' gives explicit contextual guidance on when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly name alternative tools for related purposes.

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