RBX Invest Roblox Limiteds market data

Rank Roblox UGC creators

rank_creators

Creators ranked across the whole Roblox Limited market — who is biggest, and whose releases most often end up profitable. get_creator answers about one creator you can already name; this finds them. Ranking by profitability shows only creators with enough settled releases to rate, and by growth only those with 3 or more items, because an average over one release is noise.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No	chance = how often their releases end up profitable, score = RBX Invest's creator rating, totalValue = RAP across everything they have made, copies = copies of their items in circulation, uniqueItems = how many Limiteds they have released, growth = average lifetime appreciation against the price they first sold at (the old measure, not the windowed move the item sorts call growth).	totalValue
`limit`	No
`query`	No	Part of a creator name, to rank within matching creators.
`offset`	No	Rows to skip, for reading past the first page.
`direction`	No		desc

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful hidden behavior: profitability ranking requires enough settled releases, and growth ranking requires at least 3 items because a one-item average is noise. It does not mention output shape or pagination behavior, but the disclosed thresholds are valuable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences with each earning its place: first establishes scope and purpose, second distinguishes from get_creator, third explains important ranking thresholds. It is front-loaded and free of fluff, though slightly lengthier than the sparsest possible definition.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should clarify what the agent can expect back. It covers ranking semantics and thresholds well, but it does not describe the result shape, what fields are returned per creator, or edge behavior for empty results. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 60%, with sort, query, and offset described, but limit and direction left to inference. The description adds meaning by explaining profitability and growth sort semantics beyond the enum descriptions, but it does not compensate for the undocumented limit and direction parameters.

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 ranks Roblox UGC creators across the whole Limited market, with a specific focus on who is biggest and whose releases are most often profitable. It also explicitly differentiates from get_creator, which handles a single already-known creator, making the tool's purpose and scope unambiguous.

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?

It directly names get_creator as the alternative when you already know a specific creator, and positions rank_creators as the discovery/ranking tool. It provides clear context for when to use this tool, though it does not explicitly discuss other sibling tools like rank_players or search_items.

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

All RBX Invest Roblox Limiteds market data 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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map to a distinct resource/action, and descriptions explicitly disambiguate rank_creators from get_creator and player rankings from player holdings. The only notable overlaps are find_deals as a specialized filter of search_items and get_market_cap vs get_market_stats, though the descriptions clarify the differences.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (find_*, get_*, rank_*, search_*). No mixed conventions or vague names like 'process' or 'execute' appear.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools cover a read-only market data domain without bloat. Each tool addresses a distinct query type: search, detail, rankings, aggregates, deals, recent items, and articles.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers core workflows: search/screen the catalog, drill into items, evaluate creators and players, check market aggregates, find deals, and retrieve guides. Minor gaps like item-level historical price series and filtering a creator's full catalog are not explicitly exposed, but agents can work around them with search_items and get_item_details.

Resources

Need Help?