Skip to main content
Glama

lookup_card

Retrieves full stats, abilities, and format legality for a specific Lorcana card by name, with optional set filter.

Instructions

Look up one specific, already-known Lorcana card by (near-)exact name and return its full stats, abilities, and format legality in one call.

Behavior: tries an exact name match against LorcanaJSON first, then falls back to a plain substring match — this is simple matching, not fuzzy scoring. If the same card name exists across multiple sets/printings and set_name isn't given, it silently returns the most recent printing rather than listing the alternatives (Enchanted/Epic/promo variants are gameplay-identical to the base card either way, so this rarely matters for stats — but a specific older printing's card ID/legality nuance won't surface without set_name). Card data (LorcanaJSON + duels.ink) is fetched live and cached on disk for 24h — see lorcana-mcp cache stats / cache clear if you suspect stale data right after a new set drops.

Usage guidelines: reach for this first when you already have a specific printed card name (even with the subtitle omitted, e.g. "Mirage") — it's the cheapest, most precise lookup. If it returns "no card found" for a name you're unsure is spelled/formatted correctly (informal phrasing, missing dashes, a likely typo, or a bare first name meant to cover several printings), retry with resolve_card instead, which fuzzy-matches and will disambiguate multiple candidates rather than failing outright. For browsing/filtering many cards by criteria instead of one known name, use search_cards.

Args: name: Card name, e.g. "Mirage - Super Recruiter" or just "Mirage". set_name: Optional set name to narrow the search, e.g. "Wilds Unknown".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
set_nameNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.7

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so richly: exact-then-substring matching (not fuzzy), silent selection of the most recent printing when multiple exist without set_name, the consequence for older printings' IDs/legality, and live fetch with 24h disk caching plus cache-invalidation guidance. These are precisely the non-obvious behaviors an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with the core lookup purpose, then behavior, then usage routing. It is long, but nearly every sentence carries actionable detail (fallback matching, silent recency, caching); only mild tightening is possible without losing signal.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description still summarizes the payload (stats, abilities, legality). For a two-param lookup with no annotations, the behavioral, usage, and parameter context is complete enough to call it correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: concrete examples for name ('Mirage - Super Recruiter' or just 'Mirage') and set_name ('Wilds Unknown'), plus the behavioral effect of omitting set_name. It doesn't explicitly note whether set_name must be an exact string or how mismatches behave, leaving a minor gap.

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?

States a specific verb (look up), resource (one already-known Lorcana card), and the scope of the return (full stats, abilities, format legality) in one call. It clearly distinguishes itself from resolve_card (fuzzy) and search_cards (browsing), so an agent can route without opening siblings.

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?

Explicitly names when to use this (specific printed card name, even with subtitle omitted), the exact failure condition under which to switch (a 'no card found' result for uncertain/informal/misspelled names), and the correct alternative in each case (resolve_card for fuzzy disambiguation, search_cards for browsing). Nothing is left to inference.

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