POKEKA — Pokémon Card Prices

Market movers

market_movers

Read-only

Use when the user asks which Pokémon cards are rising or falling, what is hot, or the biggest moves this week/month. lang = "en" / "ja" / "zh-cn" (market tracks never mix). direction = "up" (cards rising) or "down" (cards falling), default "up". window = "7d" / "30d" / "90d"; omit to use the default window published for that track. Every row passes a liquidity gate — at least 5 verified sales in both the current and the base window, change capped at ±40%, both medians consistent with the card's reference price — and carries price_now / price_base / n_cur / n_prev, so a listed move is a real same-card, same-grade move. Up to 20 cards.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`lang`	Yes	Market track: "en", "ja" or "zh-cn".
`window`	No	Change window: "7d", "30d" or "90d". Omit to use the default window published for that track.
`direction`	No	"up" = cards rising, "down" = cards falling. Default "up".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`market`	No
`movers`	No
`window`	No
`direction`	No
`anchor_date`	No	The window anchors to this latest-sale date; present it.
`mover_count`	No

Schema Changelog

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

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 3, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / direction / description

Previous value: -"Gainers (up) or losers (down), default up."New value: +"\"up\" = cards rising, \"down\" = cards falling. Default \"up\"."

changedInput schema / properties / lang / description

Previous value: -"Market track."New value: +"Market track: \"en\", \"ja\" or \"zh-cn\"."

changedInput schema / properties / window / description

Previous value: -"Change window. Omit to use the default window published for that track."New value: +"Change window: \"7d\", \"30d\" or \"90d\". Omit to use the default window published for that track."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 28, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / movers / items / properties / price_basis

Added value: +{
+  "description": "\"reference\" = price_usd is a PriceCharting aggregate, NOT our verified sales — say so when quoting it.",
+  "enum": [
+    "verified_sales",
+    "reference"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 1, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / lang / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "en",
-  "ja"
-]New value: +[
+  "en",
+  "ja",
+  "zh-cn"
+]

changedInput schema / properties / window / description

Previous value: -"Change window, default 30d."New value: +"Change window. Omit to use the default window published for that track."

First observedJul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: liquidity gates, the ±40% cap, median consistency checks, real same-card/same-grade moves, and a 20-card limit. This meaningfully informs the agent about result trustworthiness and constraints.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: use case, parameter semantics, data quality rules, and row meaning all appear without repetition. The critical usage guidance is front-loaded.

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?

Given the annotations, rich input schema, and output schema, the description fully covers when to invoke the tool, what each parameter means, what guarantees each row has, and the result limit. Nothing required for correct invocation is missing.

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 all parameters have enums, so the schema already does the heavy lifting. The description still adds value by clarifying defaults, the meaning of direction/window, and the 'market tracks never mix' constraint.

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 opens with a specific use case: identifying Pokémon cards that are rising or falling, hot, or making the biggest moves. This clearly names the resource (card movers) and distinguishes the tool's function from generic price or market brief tools.

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?

It explicitly says when to use the tool ('Use when the user asks which Pokémon cards are rising or falling...') and covers the main intent variants. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the usage context is clear enough.

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

All POKEKA — Pokémon Card Prices tools Inspect

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.

Resources

Need Help?