Skip to main content
Glama
Silverkazimi

splinterlands-mcp

by Silverkazimi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

land_stake_deed_details

Get the staking summary for a Splinterlands land deed, showing worker counts, boosts, totals, and staking flags. Supply a plot ID or deed UID to retrieve the full record.

Instructions

Includes plot_view with the public overview PRODUCTION / HR value (Total PP times efficiency, or unscaled with Runi; zero when explicitly unpowered), plus separately labelled reference PP and resource-output values. Missing inputs remain unknown; raw response and provenance are preserved. Get the staking summary the upstream reports for one land deed, as GET /land/stake/deed/details/{deedUid} returns it. A successful response has {status, data}, where data is one flat record of the deed's staking flags, worker counts, boosts and totals. A deed with nothing staked returns that record fully present, with its numeric fields zero and its boolean flags false, so an empty answer on this route is a populated record rather than an absent one. On this route the boost and total figures are JSON numbers; the deed-assets tool returns the equivalent per-card figures as JSON strings. The two routes disagree about wire type, this server returns each exactly as received, and a change in that wire type would be reported as a malformed response rather than converted silently. The record carries a manager string as returned by the upstream; its role is not stated. A deed uid the upstream does not recognise was measured to return a successful response holding no record rather than an error, so an answer holding no record establishes neither that the deed exists nor that it does not: this server cannot tell it apart from a deed that exists and has no staking record. The one deed with nothing staked that this repository observed returned the zeroed record described above rather than no record, which is a single observation and not a rule. The deed-assets tool answers a rejected deed uid with an upstream error instead, so the two tools do not behave alike on a bad deed uid. This tool reports only what the record states: it does not compute free slots, does not derive which cards are staked, and does not treat a total as evidence about any individual card. Supply exactly one plot_id (numeric or display label) or deed_uid; the original UID spelling is also accepted. Reference resolution may add one verified deed GET before the target GET, with a hard two-request limit. Populated resolved results include all three plot identities and resolution freshness.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
deedUidNo
plot_idNo
deed_uidNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / plot_id / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "minimum": 1,
-    "type": "integer"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+    "minimum": 1,
+    "type": "integer"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses wire type differences (JSON numbers vs strings), behavior on empty records (populated zeros vs no record), the manager string's unstated role, preservation of raw response, and limitations (does not compute slots, does not derive staked cards). This is thorough and honest about edge cases.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is dense and lengthy, covering many caveats and comparisons. While each sentence adds value, there is redundancy (e.g., repeated mentions of zeroed record) and the front-loading is not optimal—the core purpose appears only after several technical details. It is structured but not concise.

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?

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description provides extensive context: response shape, edge cases, differences from siblings, and parameter usage. It misses a precise field list of the returned record but covers nearly all operative aspects needed 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. It clarifies the one-of requirement and that plot_id can be numeric or display label, and that original UID spelling is accepted. However, it does not elaborate on the meaning of each parameter beyond these usage notes, which is adequate given the simple parameter set.

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 states the verb and resource precisely: 'Get the staking summary the upstream reports for one land deed, as GET /land/stake/deed/details/{deedUid} returns it.' It clarifies the response structure and separates it from the sibling deed-assets tool, making its unique role clear.

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 instructs to 'Supply exactly one plot_id (numeric or display label) or deed_uid' and notes reference resolution may add a request. It contrasts behavior on a bad deed uid with the deed-assets tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over the sibling, leaving some inference to the agent.

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