VGC Teambuilder

Validate a team for a regulation

validate_team

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a team against a Pokémon Champions regulation: each Pokémon is on the regulation's allowed list, Species Clause, Item Clause, at most four moves each, moves are learnable and abilities belong to the Pokémon. A Mega Evolution named directly (e.g. "Charizard-Mega-Y") is checked as its base Pokémon holding its Mega Stone. It does not check stat spreads or held-item availability. Move data comes from Pokémon Showdown across all generations, not Pokémon Champions' own move lists, so a move from an older game can pass and a Champions-only move can fail.

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": {
      "team": "<team>"
    },
    "name": "validate_team"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`team`	Yes	Team members. Only `pokemon` is required for each
`format`	No	Regulation id from list_formats. Defaults to "champions-regmc" (Pokémon Champions — Regulation M-C).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`rules`	Yes
`valid`	Yes	True when there are no errors
`errors`	Yes
`format`	Yes	Regulation id the result applies to
`members`	Yes
`warnings`	Yes	Cautions that do not make the team invalid
`formatName`	Yes	Display name of the regulation

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real behavioral context beyond them. It discloses the Mega Evolution resolution rule (a named Mega is checked as its base form holding its Mega Stone) and a data-source caveat that Showdown move data spans all generations, meaning older-game moves can pass and Champions-only moves can fail. Those are exactly the false-positive/false-negative behaviors an agent needs to interpret results.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the enforced rules then the edge case then the limitation. Every sentence carries distinct information: rule set, Mega handling, data-source caveat and exclusions. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

The output schema covers return values, so the description need not explain them. For a two-parameter validator it supplies everything material: what is validated, how Mega forms are resolved, what is out of scope, and where the move data comes from. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by explaining how a Pokémon name containing a Mega form is interpreted, which is input-semantics rather than schema repetition. It does not expand on the item/ability/moves fields, but the schema already documents those with examples and constraints.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ("Check a team against a Pokémon Champions regulation") and then enumerates the exact rules enforced: allowed list, Species Clause, Item Clause, four-move cap, learnability, ability ownership. The explicit exclusions (stat spreads, held-item availability) and the Mega Evolution handling further sharpen the boundary so an agent can tell this apart from validate_moveset or analyze_team_types.

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?

Gives clear context for when the tool applies and states two things it does not check, which prevents over-broad reliance. It also implicitly routes the agent to list_formats by noting the format id comes from there. It stops short of naming a sibling for the excluded checks (e.g. pointing to a moveset validator), so it is clear but not fully routed.

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

All VGC Teambuilder tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.