Skip to main content
Glama
birdwell

RuneScape Wiki MCP Server

by birdwell
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Compare Items

compare_items
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare latest Grand Exchange prices for up to 10 RuneScape items in one call. Provide names or IDs; get price, volume, and timestamp per item, with errors returned as rows.

Instructions

Compare latest Grand Exchange prices for up to 10 items in one call. Provide either names or itemIds. Returns one row per entry with id, name, price, volume and timestamp; entries that cannot be resolved come back as error rows instead of failing the call.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesNoItem names to compare (1-10). Provide names or itemIds, not both.
itemIdsNoGrand Exchange item IDs to compare (1-10). Provide names or itemIds, not both.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rowsYes
comparedYesNumber of rows returned

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.1
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "compared": {
+      "description": "Number of rows returned",
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    "rows": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "error": {
+            "description": "Present when this row could not be resolved",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Grand Exchange item ID",
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "price": {
+            "description": "Latest price in coins",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "query": {
+            "description": "Name or id that was requested",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "timestamp": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "volume": {
+            "type": "number"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "query"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "compared",
+    "rows"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), so the description's real contribution is the failure semantics: unresolved entries return error rows rather than failing the whole call. That is genuinely useful context an agent cannot derive from the annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences, no padding, with the batch scope and input contract front-loaded and the return-shape/failure behavior placed after. Every clause carries information.

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 fields needn't be documented, yet the description still summarizes the row shape and resolution-failure behavior. Combined with annotations covering the read-only/idempotent profile, nothing needed to call this correctly is missing.

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 100% — the 1-10 bounds, uniqueness, and 'names or itemIds, not both' constraint are all already documented in the schema. The description only restates the either/or rule, adding no format, casing, or resolution-order detail beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Compare latest Grand Exchange prices') plus a scope qualifier ('up to 10 items in one call') that distinguishes it from the single-item siblings like get_item_price and lookup_item. It never names a sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives the input contract ('Provide either names or itemIds') but no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to get_item_price, lookup_item, or estimate_flip. The batch-comparison use case is implied by 'up to 10 items in one call' but never framed as the reason to pick this tool.

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