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 (at most 10,000).
`direction`	No		desc

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Previous value: -25New value: +100
```

changedInput schema / properties / offset / description

Previous value: -"Rows to skip, for reading past the first page (at most 500)."New value: +"Rows to skip, for reading past the first page (at most 10,000)."

changedInput schema / properties / offset / maximum
```
Previous value: -500New value: +10000
```

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 5, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / offset / description

Previous value: -"Rows to skip, for reading past the first page."New value: +"Rows to skip, for reading past the first page (at most 500)."

addedInput schema / properties / offset / maximum
```
Added value: +500
```

First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses meaningful behavioral constraints: certain sort modes filter out creators with insufficient data (profitability and growth), which is real invocation-relevant context. However, it says nothing about read-only nature, result size defaults, pagination behavior, or what a result row contains.

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, each earning its place: scope, sibling routing, and a caveat on sort-mode behavior. Front-loaded with the primary purpose and no filler.

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?

For a paginated ranking tool with five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description covers scope and sort caveats but omits result shape, pagination guidance, and default behavior. It is adequate but leaves gaps an agent would have to infer.

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 60%. The description adds real meaning for the 'growth' sort, clarifying it is lifetime appreciation versus the windowed measure used by item sorts, and distinguishes chance as profitability frequency. That said, it doesn't clarify the remaining under-documented parameters and the schema already documents limit, offset, query, and direction.

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?

States a specific verb (rank) and resource (creators) with explicit scope: 'ranked across the whole Roblox Limited market.' It directly distinguishes itself from the sibling get_creator with 'get_creator answers about one creator you can already name; this finds them,' letting an agent route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative (get_creator) and the condition that selects between them, plus states when some sort modes return results (profitability needs settled releases, growth needs 3+ items). It does not cover when to pick rank_creators over rank_players beyond the obvious resource difference, so it falls short of a full 5.

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

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.

Resources

Need Help?