Skip to main content
Glama

The Undesirables TCG Oracle

by io.github.sailorpepe

card_forecast

Get the conformal-calibrated 30-day price forecast AND letter grades for a single card in ONE free call. Pass either a card_name (resolved to the best match) or a TCGplayer product_id.

FREE — no payment required. Returns an agent-complete object: price, as_of, regime, point (median 30d), move_pct, prob_up, band50_pct, band90_pct, var95_pct, var99_pct, low90, high90, safe_hold grade (A+..F), momentum grade (A+..F or "NA" on a drift spike), drift_spike, image_url, card_url, and a one-line plain_english read (e.g. "~12% chance it's below $Y in 30 days; Safe-Hold B, Momentum A").

Use this when a user asks "is this card a safe hold?", "what's the 30-day outlook?", "how risky is X?", or wants a quick grade on a card. Tip: GET /api/v1/forecast (no args) returns the free board of the top ~200 cards if the user wants a market overview.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
card_nameNo
product_idNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description is the only disclosure source, and it is thorough: it advertises that the call is FREE, lists the full returned object, explains grade ranges (A+..F), calls out the momentum grade 'NA' on a drift spike, and notes that card_name is resolved to the best match. This goes well beyond the minimal 'returns a forecast'.

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 main action is in the first sentence, and every following sentence adds operational value: free status, return schema, concrete user queries, and an alternative route to market-level data. The dense field list is justified because there is no output schema to carry that information.

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?

The definition covers what the tool does, the two input modes, the complete output surface, representative example questions, and a sibling alternative for market overview. Since there is no output schema, the thorough return-field enumeration is essential and is provided.

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 0%, so the description must supply meaning. It does: card_name is 'resolved to the best match' and product_id is a TCGplayer product_id, and it frames them as alternatives ('Pass either... or...'). It lacks explicit guidance on precedence or behavior if both are supplied, which keeps it from a 5.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb ('Get'), a precise resource ('conformal-calibrated 30-day price forecast AND letter grades'), and scopes it to 'a single card.' The field list and 'single card' wording distinguish it from broader sibling tools like market_snapshot or sports_board.

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?

It explicitly states 'Use this when a user asks...' with concrete example questions, which tells an agent exactly when to select this tool. It also provides a clear alternative: the no-arg GET /api/v1/forecast for a market overview, so the agent knows what not to use this tool for.

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

All The Undesirables TCG Oracle 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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools have unclear boundaries: card_forecast and simulate_price both return conformal-calibrated forecasts with Safe-Hold/Momentum grades; grade_card and grade_or_not both include ROI verdicts; check_accuracy and oracle_scorecard are both accuracy dashboards; market_snapshot and trending_cards both surface market movers. The descriptions carry some differentiators, but an agent would frequently misselect among these pairs.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case, which is consistent, but the verb/noun pattern is mixed: some are verb_noun (check_accuracy, grade_card, optimize_portfolio, search_tcg_products, simulate_price), while many are noun_noun or noun phrases (card_forecast, market_snapshot, oracle_scorecard, sports_board, souls_in_wallet). The result is readable but not predictable.

Tool Count3/5

23 tools sits in the heavy 16–25 band, and the server spans several domains: TCG pricing/forecasting/grading, souls and fantasy, the Syndicate game, and technocore. It is not extreme, but the count feels bigger than a single focused oracle needs.

Completeness4/5

The core card-market workflow is well covered: search, price forecast, simulation, trending, market snapshot, grading, ROI, loan preview, and accuracy verification are all present. Minor gaps include the paid loan quote for off-board cards not being exposed as an MCP tool and some redundancy between card_forecast and simulate_price, but no CRUD lidecycle is required for a read-only oracle.

Resources