Rebrickable

Sets

sets

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Rebrickable LEGO sets by keyword, theme_id, year range, or part count range. Returns set number, name, year, part count, theme, and image URL. Use themes to get valid theme IDs.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`page`	No
`query`	No
`max_year`	No
`min_year`	No
`ordering`	No
`theme_id`	No
`max_parts`	No
`min_parts`	No
`page_size`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`next`	No	URL to next page of results
`count`	No	Total number of sets matching criteria
`results`	No	Array of set objects
`previous`	No	URL to previous page of results

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 22, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "Star Wars"
+  },
+  {
+    "max_year": 2024,
+    "min_parts": 500,
+    "min_year": 2020,
+    "ordering": "-year",
+    "theme_id": 1
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Total number of sets matching criteria",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "next": {
+      "description": "URL to next page of results",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "previous": {
+      "description": "URL to previous page of results",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "Array of set objects",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "last_modified_dt": {
+            "description": "Last modification date",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Set name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "num_minifigs": {
+            "description": "Number of minifigures in set",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "num_parts": {
+            "description": "Number of parts in set",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "set_img_url": {
+            "description": "Image URL for set",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "set_num": {
+            "description": "Set number identifier",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "set_url": {
+            "description": "Rebrickable URL for set",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "theme_id": {
+            "description": "Theme ID",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "year": {
+            "description": "Year set was released",
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already convey readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive nature. The description adds that it returns specific fields but no additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior or rate limits.

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 with no wasted words; front-loaded with core purpose and immediately actionable.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Despite having an output schema, the description omits crucial details about pagination (page, page_size) and ordering, which are essential for effective use of this search tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only loosely mentions keyword, theme_id, year range, and part count range as filters. Parameters like page, page_size, and ordering are not explained, leaving ambiguity.

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 'Search Rebrickable LEGO sets' and lists filtering options (keyword, theme_id, year range, part count range) and return fields, distinguishing it from related tools like 'set', 'parts', and 'themes'.

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 description advises using the 'themes' tool for valid theme IDs, providing actionable guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set' for a single set.

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

All Rebrickable 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.