get_activity_exercise_setsRetrieve exercise sets for a strength training activity using its activity ID. Get set-by-set details to review workout performance.
Get exercise sets from a strength training activity.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| activityId | Yes | The unique activity identifier (required) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention of empty results, error conditions, or differences from similar endpoints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core function.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, simple read operation), the description is adequate. It states the resource and context clearly, though it could note behavior for non-strength activities. Overall, it is sufficient.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter activityId, including its type and description. The tool description does not add further parameter semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly identifies the operation ('Get') and the specific resource ('exercise sets'), and scopes it to 'a strength training activity.' This distinguishes it from siblings like get_activity_splits or get_activity_details.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies use for strength training activities but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives. It relies on the tool name and context to convey intended usage.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.