Skip to main content
Glama

pokeapi-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads

Get Item

pokeapi_get_item
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get item details by name or numeric ID — effect text, category, in-game cost, fling power, item attributes (holdable, consumable, etc.), sprite URL, and Pokémon that commonly hold it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
identifierYesItem name in lowercase hyphenated form (e.g. "choice-specs", "leftovers") or numeric ID as a string.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoItem ID.
costNoPurchase cost in Pokédollars. 0 means not sold in shops.
nameNoItem name in hyphenated lowercase.
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
categoryNoItem category (e.g. "held-items", "medicine").
spriteUrlNoItem sprite URL. Null when no sprite is available.
attributesNoItem attributes (e.g. "holdable", "consumable", "usable-in-battle").
effectTextNoFull English effect description. Null when unavailable.
flingPowerNoFling move base power when this item is flung. Null if not throwable.
heldByPokemonNoPokémon that commonly hold this item in the wild.
shortEffectTextNoShort English effect summary. Null when unavailable.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by specifying what data is returned (effect text, category, cost, fling power, attributes, sprite URL, holding Pokémon), providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the action and resource, then lists the returned fields. There is zero wordiness—every word earns its place. Ideal conciseness.

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?

For a simple single-parameter fetch tool with an output schema and annotations covering safety, the description is fully sufficient. It communicates the core behavior and return content clearly. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%—the parameter is fully documented in the schema, including the lowercase hyphenated format and numeric ID option. The description repeats this information without adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies. It is consistent but not additive.

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 fetches item details by name or numeric ID and enumerates the specific data returned (effect text, category, cost, etc.). This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools like pokeapi_get_pokemon or pokeapi_get_ability, which target different resources.

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?

The purpose is so resource-specific that usage is unambiguous—agents will naturally select this for item queries. However, the description offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it, relying on the clear naming convention. This matches 'clear context, no exclusions'.

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

All pokeapi-mcp-server 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 maps to a distinct entity—Pokémon, ability, item, move, nature, or type matchup—with no overlap. pokeapi_find_pokemon serves as a discovery filter, while pokeapi_get_pokemon retrieves full details, making their roles unambiguous.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools share the consistent pokeapi_ prefix and follow a clear verb-noun pattern: get_<resource> for retrieval and find_pokemon for search. The convention is uniform and predictable across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the server is well-scoped for a Pokémon data API. Each tool covers a core data type without redundancy, and the count is neither too sparse nor overwhelming for agents to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the primary Pokémon domain—individual Pokémon, abilities, items, moves, natures, and type matchups—plus discovery via filters. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no dedicated berry or encounter tools), but core workflows like team-building and battle analysis are fully supported.

Resources