Skip to main content
Glama

wiki_rank

Rank the wiki's entities by a NUMERIC field and return the top (or bottom) N. Use this for ANY 'which has the most/least/highest/lowest X' question — never guess-and-confirm with wiki_search. Choose a kind, the field to rank 'by', order (desc = highest first, the default; asc = lowest first), an optional limit (default 5, max 25), an optional 'category' to scope to one tag (food/item/species only — e.g. category "seed"), and an optional numeric 'where' filter. Available fields by kind (a field that doesn't apply to a given entity — e.g. a tool stat on a non-tool — simply excludes it): • food: calories, carbs, fat, protein, shelf_life, stack, vitamins, weight • item (base + placed-object + tool + block facets): air_pollution, animal_damage, block_tier, calories_burn, damage, durability_burn, fertility, fuel, fuel_jps, grid_radius, hardness, harvest_yield, housing_value, interact_distance, is_fuel, is_mintable, is_road, is_weapon, labor_max, labor_min, link_radius, max_coins, max_durability, move_efficiency, pollution, power_generated, power_watts, repair_level, room_tier, room_volume, school_value, seats, size_x, size_y, size_z, stack, storage_slots, storage_weight, tool_tier, vehicle_speed, weight • recipe: craft_minutes, crafting_steps, ingredients, labor, products, skill_level, skill_max_level, xp • skill: max_level, tier • species (animals ∪ plants/trees): attacks_player, calorie_value, co2_per_day, health, ideal_temp_max, ideal_temp_min, is_predator, nocturnal, yield_min_total, yield_total Bool fields read as 1/0 (e.g. where { field: "is_predator", op: "=", value: 1 }). Example: { kind: "food", by: "calories", order: "desc", limit: 3 } → the 3 highest-calorie foods. Scoped example: { kind: "food", by: "shelf_life", order: "asc", category: "seed" } → the seeds that spoil fastest. Optional character/server PROFILE (skill_level/skills, talents, modules/module, server) re-ranks the profile-sensitive metrics — recipe labor/craft_minutes; tool damage/calories_burn/durability_burn; item harvest_yield/power_watts; species yield_total/yield_min_total (craft_minutes also honors server craftTime). All other fields are static facts and ignore the profile (the result carries a note). No profile = base ranking.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
byYesNumeric field to rank by (see this tool's description for the field names valid for each kind).
kindYesWhich entity set to rank.
limitNoHow many to return (default 5, max 25).
orderNodesc = highest first (default), asc = lowest first.
whereNoOptional single numeric filter applied before ranking/aggregating, e.g. { field: "weight", op: "<", value: 1000 }. The field must come from the same per-kind set as 'by'/'field'.
moduleNoA single module name/type, or a comma-separated list (alternative to modules[]).
serverNoModel a DIFFERENT server's difficulty (default = this server's real settings; omit for accurate answers). Fields: craftResource, craftTime, growth, garbageRatio, fuelEfficiency, foodVariety, foodTastiness, baseGain, minBalanced, maxBalanced. Only craft_minutes is server-sensitive for ranking.
skillsNoPer-skill levels: { "<skill FullName>": level }. Overrides skill_level for those skills.
modulesNoUpgrade-module names/types installed (multiple slots stack).
talentsNoTalent names/types to treat as learned (profile-sensitive metrics only).
categoryNoOptional: scope to ONE tag/category before ranking/aggregating, e.g. "seed", "vegetable", "gun". Only the tagged kinds (food / item / species) support this. Use the category's name from a wiki_search result; matching is case- and plural-insensitive.
skill_levelNoA single skill level applied to every governing skill (profile-sensitive metrics only).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it delivers thoroughly. It reveals that fields not applying to an entity simply exclude it, that bool fields read as 1/0, that optional profile inputs re-rank only profile-sensitive metrics while all others are static facts that yield a note, and that no profile gives base ranking. This is unusually complete behavioral disclosure.

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?

Long, but every section earns its place given the tool's 12-parameter complexity. The purpose sentence is front-loaded, followed by structured bullet lists of per-kind fields, concrete examples with actual JSON, and a clearly delineated profile paragraph. Dense but well-organized and scannable.

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?

With no output schema and 12 parameters including nested objects, the description must be nearly self-sufficient, and it is. It covers defaults, limits, kinds and their valid fields, boolean handling, the 'where' filter shape, category scoping, behavior when fields don't apply, and profile sensitivity — everything an agent needs to construct a correct call.

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% and the schema already documents each parameter's type and purpose. The description nonetheless adds substantial value beyond the schema: the full per-kind field inventories, defaults (limit 5, max 25, order desc), boolean encoding for the 'where' filter, and the profile-sensitivity mapping. This meaningfully exceeds the baseline 3.

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 and resource: 'Rank the wiki's entities by a NUMERIC field and return the top (or bottom) N.' It differentiates from the sibling search tool by explicitly instructing to use it for ranking questions and never guess-and-confirm with wiki_search. The purpose is unmistakable and distinct from siblings like wiki_aggregate.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this for ANY "which has the most/least/highest/lowest X" question — never guess-and-confirm with wiki_search.' It names the primary alternative to avoid. It could enumerate other siblings (aggregate, calc, total_raw) but the single exclusion plus the clear trigger phrase is strong directional guidance.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

search and wiki_search both perform full-text search over the Eco wiki and return similar ranked matches, making them easy to confuse. fetch and wiki_get also overlap as page-retrieval tools, though the crafting calculators are clearly differentiated.

Naming Consistency3/5

Most tools use a wiki_ prefix, but fetch and search break that pattern, and the suffixes are stylistically mixed (wiki_bom, wiki_calc, wiki_total_raw, wiki_contract_basics). The names remain readable and consistently lowercase snake_case, so the inconsistency is moderate rather than chaotic.

Tool Count4/5

Ten tools is a reasonable size for a wiki server covering search, retrieval, structured facts, numeric analysis, and crafting calculations. The count is slightly padded by the duplicate search tools and overlapping retrieval tools, but it is not excessive.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers browsing, full-text search, structured entity facts, ranking, aggregation, multiple crafting-depth views, and gameplay mechanics like contracts. There are no obvious read-side dead ends, and write operations are appropriately absent for a wiki reference server.

Resources