PoB PoE2 MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

pob_gem_tooltip

Read-only

Generates a Path of Building gem tooltip description for an installed or catalog gem, using group/source indexes or gem id, level, and quality while leaving build XML and revision unchanged.

Instructions

Описание камня исходным GemTooltip. Для установленного камня укажите groupId и sourceIndex; для каталога или черновика — id, level и quality. XML и ревизия не изменяются.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "pob_gem_tooltip"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	No
`level`	No
`groupId`	No
`quality`	No
`sourceIndex`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.15.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds only that XML and the revision are left unmodified, which reinforces a read-only lookup but adds little beyond the existing hints and says nothing about the returned tooltip payload.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and then the two parameter modes, with the immutability note last. No filler wording.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a parameterized read-only lookup with no output schema, it explains both calling modes and the non-mutating nature, which is enough to invoke it correctly. A brief note on what fields the tooltip contains would have closed the remaining gap.

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 carry the burden; it does group all five parameters into two coherent calling modes (installed build vs catalog/draft) and explains what each set identifies. It still omits the acceptable ranges and formats (level 1-40, quality 0-100, id string form) that the agent only learns from the JSON schema constraints.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: it returns the gem description from the original GemTooltip, which separates it from pob_node_tooltip and from the icon/support siblings. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

Gives explicit conditional routing: groupId+sourceIndex for an installed gem, id+level+quality for a catalog or draft gem. That tells an agent which branch applies, though it never states when a sibling such as pob_gem_supports or pob_gem_icons would be the better call.

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