Pokemon Go MCP Server

search_events

Find Pokemon Go events by searching event names and descriptions. Use a query to locate specific in-game events.

Instructions

Search for Pokemon Go events by name or description.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_events"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	Search term to look for in event names and types

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are available, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, response format, or side effects. It simply states 'Search', leaving the agent with no insight into what happens when the tool is invoked.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no redundancy. While it is short, it packs the essential purpose. It could be improved with structure but remains efficient.

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?

Given the many sibling tools for searching and event details, the description lacks completeness. It does not clarify how this search differs from others like 'search_pokemon_everywhere', and does not mention the output schema, leaving agents uncertain about the result structure.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for the 'query' parameter. The tool description adds the fields 'name' and 'description', but the schema says 'names and types', causing a slight inconsistency. Overall, the schema already provides adequate semantics.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Search' and resource 'Pokemon Go events', specifying the mode by name or description. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_current_events' and 'get_event_details' which are for retrieving specific events rather than searching. However, the description is brief and could benefit from clarifying the scope.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_current_events' or 'search_egg_pokemon'. The description does not give context for effective selection, relying solely on the tool name and sibling list.

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

Deploy Server