Skip to main content
Glama
Silverkazimi

splinterlands-mcp

by Silverkazimi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

vapi_market_player_activity

Retrieve a Splinterlands player's market purchase and sale activity to review transaction IDs, item IDs, detail IDs, and USD values.

Instructions

Read account market purchases and sales. A fresh sample returned buyer-matched purchases, seller-matched sales and both for types=purchase,sale. Rows included trxId, itemId, detailId and usdValue. The public client uses types=purchase,sale and sort=desc; limit bounded returned rows. Omitted offset returned rows while explicit offset=0 and offset=1 returned none. Do not infer complete history or working pagination. Makes one logical GET request Does not auto-fetch continuation pages. Required inputs reflect tool policy as well as measured upstream requirements. Other declared filters are forwarded as supplied; their effectiveness is not implied by the schema. The data list are locally limited to 100 rows and 256 KiB, with truncation reported in text and metadata. Oversized records are refused without partial fields.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortYes
limitYes
typesYes
offsetNo
playerYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.5
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "player",
-  "types",
-  "sort",
-  "limit",
-  "offset"
-]New value: +[
+  "player",
+  "types",
+  "sort",
+  "limit"
+]
  2. First observedv0.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: local caps of 100 rows and 256 KiB, truncation reported in text/metadata, oversized records refused without partial fields, single logical GET with no continuation fetching, and odd offset behavior. This is rich beyond the schema, though the offset observation is vaguely worded.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a dense run-on of many clauses with at least one missing period ('Makes one logical GET request Does not auto-fetch...'). Key purpose is buried behind sample-anecdote and caveat sentences rather than front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

With no output schema the description usefully names returned fields (trxId, itemId, detailId, usdValue) and covers limits and request behavior, which is a lot for a 5-param tool. Still, required inputs and filter semantics are under-explained, so it is adequate but incomplete.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it partially does by giving example values for types=purchase,sale and sort=desc, plus offset quirks. But 'player' and 'limit' get only passing mention ('limit bounded returned rows'), leaving substantial parameter meaning undocumented.

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: 'Read account market purchases and sales.' An agent knows it fetches a player's transaction activity. However, it never names or contrasts with siblings like vapi_market_player_listings or vapi_market_player_all_listings, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus the many market/history siblings. The only guidance is a caution ('Do not infer complete history or working pagination'), which warns about limits rather than routing among alternatives.

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