Skip to main content
Glama
cornndawwg

poe2-build-planner

by cornndawwg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Find scaling passives

find_passives
Read-only

Find Path of Exile 2 passive nodes matching build scaling terms, class, ascendancy, or nearby points; list ascendancy nodes to plan tree paths.

Instructions

Notables, keystones and ascendancy notables whose text matches what the build scales. Give the class (and ascendancy) to get distances from the class start and that ascendancy's nodes. Terms are words from passive text, e.g. fire, spell, cast speed, critical, ignite, minion, projectile, area of effect, energy shield, life. Set listAscendancy to get every node of the ascendancy (no terms needed), to see all 8-point options. Small passives too: kinds ["small"] with near (a node) and within (points) lists the small passives around a node, with keys to use as plan_passive_tree targets (terms optional then). Passives that need an ascendancy node first (e.g. Oracle-only ones need The Unseen Path) show it in requires.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nearNoOnly passives within a few points of this node (key, id or exact name)
classNoClass or ascendancy name
kindsNoDefault: keystone, notable, ascendancy-notable
limitNo
termsNoRequired unless listAscendancy or near is set
withinNoPoints from near (default 4)
ascendancyNo
listAscendancyNoList every node of the ascendancy, with stats
includeJewelSocketsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.6.0-beta
    • addedInput schema / properties / kinds
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Default: keystone, notable, ascendancy-notable",
+  "items": {
+    "enum": [
+      "keystone",
+      "notable",
+      "ascendancy-notable",
+      "jewel-socket",
+      "small",
+      "attribute"
+    ],
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / near
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only passives within a few points of this node (key, id or exact name)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / terms / description
      Previous value: -"Required unless listAscendancy is set"New value: +"Required unless listAscendancy or near is set"
    • addedInput schema / properties / within
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Points from near (default 4)",
+  "maximum": 10,
+  "minimum": 1,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv0.5.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring the safety profile, the description adds genuinely useful behavior: that results expose 'requires' for ascendancy-gated passives, and that returned keys are valid plan_passive_tree targets. It doesn't cover result shape, ordering, or the limit cap.

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?

Front-loaded but written as a dense chain of sentence fragments mixing purpose, term vocabulary, three usage modes, and edge cases. Every clause carries information, yet the lack of separation makes it harder to scan than the content warrants.

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 a 9-parameter, no-output-schema tool the description covers most invocation paths and hints at the returned 'requires' field and key usability. It still leaves the response payload's overall shape and pagination/limit behavior to inference.

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 67%, and the description compensates well for the important ones: terms are 'words from passive text' with a rich example list, kinds ["small"] semantics, listAscendancy meaning, near/within behavior, and the terms-optional-unless rule. It leaves limit, includeJewelSockets, and ascendancy (bare in both places) unexplained.

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 resource (notables, keystones, ascendancy notables) and what it filters on (text matching build scaling terms), plus distances from class start. It also links forward to the sibling plan_passive_tree as a consumer of its keys, though it never contrasts itself with search_skills or other lookup siblings.

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?

Gives concrete conditional usage: supply class (and ascendancy) for distances, set listAscendancy for all 8-point options, and use kinds ["small"] with near/within for small passives. It even restates the required-parameter rule ('no terms needed' / 'terms optional then'). It stops short of naming when-not-to-use or an alternative 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