Skip to main content
Glama

tcgmcp

by com.tcgmcp

list_printings

Read-onlyIdempotent

Lists every known printing of a TCG card (any of 22+ games) — every set it was printed in, with per-finish (nonfoil/foil) prices and treatment tags (border, frame, promo, full art). Use this instead of price_card when the buyer wants to compare printings, find the cheapest version, or find a specific treatment (e.g. borderless, showcase). Returns a grouping field: "oracle_id" means the printings are confirmed the exact same card; "normalized_name" is a best-effort name match that can occasionally over- or under-group.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
setNoOptional: narrow to a single set name/code. Cannot be combined with intent=cheapest or with finish/treatment.
gameNoOptional game hint (e.g. 'Magic', 'Pokemon') when the name is ambiguous across games.
nameYesCard name to look up.
finishNoOptional: narrow to printings available in a finish, e.g. 'foil' or 'etched'. Cannot be combined with intent=cheapest or with set/treatment.
intentNoOptional: "all" (default) lists every printing; "cheapest" returns only the lowest-priced one. Cannot be combined with set/finish/treatment.
treatmentNoOptional: narrow to printings with a treatment/variant, e.g. 'borderless', 'showcase', 'full_art', 'boosterfun'. Cannot be combined with intent=cheapest or with set/finish.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable context: the grouping field explanation with caveats about over/under-grouping, and that certain parameters cannot be combined. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded: what the tool does, use cases, and important caveats. Efficient and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the tool's purpose, use cases, return structure (grouping field, prices, treatments), and parameter constraints. With no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned. Minor omissions like pagination are acceptable given the simplicity.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds semantic value by explaining the grouping field, mutual exclusivity constraints, and the intent parameter's effect. This goes beyond raw schema definitions.

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 it lists every known printing of a TCG card with per-finish prices and treatment tags, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool price_card by specifying when to use it instead.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance: use for comparing printings, finding cheapest version, or specific treatment. It also mentions the grouping field and its potential inaccuracies, helping the agent decide when this tool is appropriate.

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

All tcgmcp toolsInspect
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

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: single-card price lookup, comparing printings, market trends, and deck pricing. The descriptions explicitly cross-reference each other to prevent confusion, such as list_printings noting when to use it instead of price_card.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names are lowercase with underscores, and most follow a verb_noun pattern (list_printings, price_card, price_deck). market_index is a slight deviation as a noun_noun phrase, but the naming remains intuitive and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

With only 4 tools, the server is tightly scoped to its purpose of TCG pricing and market data. Each tool covers a distinct need without redundancy, and the count is well within the ideal range for a focused server.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the core workflows for TCG pricing: single card lookups, comparing printings, decklist pricing, and market trend analysis. There are no obvious missing operations for the stated domain, making the set feel complete.

Resources