Skip to main content
Glama
Liaxum

piltover-archive

by Liaxum
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Look up Riftbound cards by identifier

piltover_get_cards
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve Riftbound cards by collector number, exact name, or UUID in one request. Use it to turn deck card IDs into real names or batch-lookup cards.

Instructions

Resolve known Riftbound cards in one request, by collector number, exact name, or UUID.

Provide at least one of variantNumbers, names or ids; they can be combined. This is the right tool for turning the cardId/variantId values inside a deck into real card names, and for looking up a list of cards without one search per card.

Args:

  • variantNumbers: collector numbers, e.g. ["OGN-007"]

  • names: exact card names, e.g. ["Vi, Destructive"]

  • ids: card or variant UUIDs

  • response_format: 'markdown' (default) or 'json'

Examples:

  • "What is OGN-007?" -> { variantNumbers: ["OGN-007"] }

  • Resolving a decklist -> { ids: ["0283d70f-…", "f40b0e74-…"] }

  • Don't use when: you are searching by criteria rather than identity — use piltover_search_cards.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoCard or variant UUIDs, as returned in deck contents.
namesNoExact card names, e.g. ["Vi, Destructive"].
variantNumbersNoCollector numbers, e.g. ["OGN-007", "ARC-001"].
response_formatNomarkdown for reading, json for further processing.markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real behavioral value by stating the cross-parameter constraint ('provide at least one of') that the schema's zero required fields does not enforce, plus the batch-vs-single-search intent and the response_format choice.

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 purpose, then the constraint, then args and mini-examples; every section is useful. The Args block partially restates the schema descriptions, which is mild redundancy but it is paired with mapping examples that add value.

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 an identity-lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, inputs, combination rules, alternatives and response_format. It does not describe the shape of returned card data, a minor gap, but the response_format hint and 'turn ids into real card names' framing give the agent 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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond it with concrete example values (["OGN-007"], ["Vi, Destructive"]) and semantic framing such as 'card or variant UUIDs, as returned in deck contents', clarifying where the ids come from.

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?

Specific verb (resolve/look up) plus resource (Riftbound cards) with three explicit lookup keys (collector number, exact name, UUID), and it names the sibling it is not (search_cards). An agent can distinguish it from piltover_search_cards without opening either schema.

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?

States the selection condition ('Provide at least one of variantNumbers, names or ids'), the concrete use cases (resolving cardId/variantId from a decklist, batch lookup to avoid one search per card), and an explicit negative case routing to piltover_search_cards for criteria-based search.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools