MTG Bench

get_card_rulings

Read-only

Fetch the OFFICIAL Wizards rulings for one card, with their dates. These are Wizards' own answers to the corner cases players argue about. Use this for any "how does this card actually work" question, and quote the ruling rather than paraphrasing from memory — rulings are among the most frequently hallucinated things in Magic. Use search_rules instead for general mechanics not tied to a specific card.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`card`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`rulings`	Yes

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds context about the rulings being official Wizards content with dates, and emphasizes the risk of hallucination. This goes beyond the annotation by describing the nature of the data and the recommended quoting behavior, though it doesn't detail the exact response structure (covered by output schema).

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence earns its place: the second provides guidance and sibling differentiation. No waste.

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?

For a simple read-only tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, and a critical caution about hallucination. It is complete for the agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 has one parameter 'name' with no description (0% coverage). The description implies 'name' is the card name by saying 'for one card', but it doesn't specify exact naming requirements or format. It adds some meaning beyond the bare schema, but could be more explicit.

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 clearly states the tool fetches official Wizards rulings for a single card with dates, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes this tool from search_rules for general mechanics, making it unique among siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (any 'how does this card actually work' question) and when not to (general mechanics, use search_rules instead). It also provides a usage caution to quote rulings rather than paraphrase from memory.

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

All MTG Bench tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: card lookup variants, search types, deck analysis, rule lookups, and collection queries are all separated by input type and operation. Overlapping names like get_card vs get_card_printings are still unambiguous because the descriptions specify the exact differences.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names use consistent lowercase snake_case formatting, but there is a mix of verb-led names (get_card, search_cards, rate_deck) and noun-led names (deck_stats, commander_staples, my_collection). The pattern is readable and predictable, but not a uniform verb_noun convention.

Tool Count4/5

With 19 tools, the server is on the heavier side but still well-scoped for the breadth of MTG: card lookup, search, rules, deck analysis, rating, upgrade suggestions, and collection management each have dedicated tools. It feels comprehensive rather than bloated, though a few could potentially be merged.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of MTG workflows: card details, text search, rules, deck legality, stats, combos, synergies, upgrades, and collection exploration. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct deck editing or saving), but the core needs of an assistant are well covered.

Resources

Need Help?