get_cardLook up a single Pokémon TCG (or other trading card game) card by its TCGdex id (e.g. "swsh3-136"). Returns full card details: category, rarity, hp, types, stage, set, illustrator, attacks, abilities, and a high-quality image URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | TCGdex card id, e.g. "swsh3-136". |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. Description adds value by detailing the return fields (category, rarity, hp, etc.) and a high-quality image URL, which is beyond what annotations cover.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence that efficiently conveys purpose, input, and output. No wasted words.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Description is complete for a simple tool with one parameter and rich annotations. It covers purpose, input format, and output details. No missing critical information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema describes the single parameter 'id' with 100% coverage. Description adds an example value 'swsh3-136' but no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states it looks up a single Pokémon TCG card by TCGdex id, listing specific return details. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_cards (which searches multiple) and get_set (which retrieves sets).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Clearly indicates when to use: to look up a single card by id. Implicitly suggests not for searching (use search_cards). No explicit alternatives or exclusions, but context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The four card tools are distinct, but the majority of the server is a Pipeworx/prediction-market platform with heavily overlapping entry points: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded, deep_research, and discover_tools all serve similar query/discovery purposes, and ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly an identical twin of ask_pipeworx. The six Polymarket tools and the ai_visibility/scan_competitor pair also have fuzzy boundaries that would make tool selection error-prone.
All names are snake_case, but the pattern is highly inconsistent: some are verb_noun (get_card, search_cards, resolve_entity), some are bare verbs (remember, forget), some are noun-first (polymarket_edges, entity_profile, bet_research), and some are adjective_noun (recent_alerts, recent_changes). The ask_pipeworx variants share a name but differ only by suffix, which is not a clear action-oriented pattern.
35 tools is squarely in the 'too many' territory, and the bloat is worse because the server is named Tcgdex while only 4 of 35 tools actually relate to trading cards. The remaining 31 tools form a sprawling multi-domain platform that mixes data queries, prediction markets, memory, subscriptions, AI visibility checks, and one-off utilities like generate_llms_txt and scan_dependency.
For the TCGdex card surface, the read-only workflows are covered well: search_cards leads to get_card, and list_sets leads to get_set, with no obvious dead ends. For the broader Pipeworx functionality, the set includes discovery, query, grounding, entity resolution, memory, subscriptions, and feedback, so the main workflows are supported—though the overall scope is sprawling rather than focused.