Skip to main content
Glama
latte-chan
by latte-chan

CSB: Find combos by card names

csb_find_combos_by_names

Find Magic: The Gathering card combos by entering card names. The tool resolves names to card IDs and searches for synergistic combinations.

Instructions

Resolve names via Scryfall → oracle_id, map to CSB IDs via cached index, then call find-my-combos.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namesYes
fuzzyNoUse Scryfall fuzzy name matching; default true
limitNo
offsetNo

Implementation Reference

  • Handler function that resolves card names to CSB IDs via Scryfall oracle lookup and index, then finds combos using CSB.findMyCombos.
    async ({ names, fuzzy = true, limit, offset }: { names: string[]; fuzzy?: boolean; limit?: number; offset?: number }) => {
        // Resolve names to oracle_ids via Scryfall
        const oracleIds: string[] = [];
        for (const name of names) {
            try {
                const card: any = await Scryfall.getCardNamed(name, fuzzy);
                const oid = (card as any)?.oracle_id || (card as any)?.oracleId || (card as any)?.oracleID;
                if (typeof oid === "string") oracleIds.push(oid);
            } catch {
                // ignore individual failures
            }
        }
        const uniqOids = Array.from(new Set(oracleIds));
        if (uniqOids.length === 0) return { content: [{ type: "text", text: "No oracle IDs resolved from names" }] } as any;
    
        const mapRes = await lookupCsbIdsByOracle(uniqOids);
        const ids = Object.values(mapRes.found);
        if (ids.length === 0) {
            return { structuredContent: { mapping: mapRes, results: null } } as any;
        }
        const combos = await CSB.findMyCombos(ids, limit, offset);
        return { structuredContent: { mapping: mapRes, results: combos } } as any;
    }
  • Input schema definition for the csb_find_combos_by_names tool.
    const csbFindByNamesInput = {
        names: z.array(z.string()).min(1),
        fuzzy: z.boolean().optional().describe("Use Scryfall fuzzy name matching; default true"),
        limit: z.number().int().min(1).max(100).optional(),
        offset: z.number().int().min(0).optional()
    } as const;
  • Registration of the csb_find_combos_by_names tool with McpServer, including schema and handler.
    server.registerTool(
        "csb_find_combos_by_names",
        {
            title: "CSB: Find combos by card names",
            description: "Resolve names via Scryfall → oracle_id, map to CSB IDs via cached index, then call find-my-combos.",
            inputSchema: csbFindByNamesInput
        },
        async ({ names, fuzzy = true, limit, offset }: { names: string[]; fuzzy?: boolean; limit?: number; offset?: number }) => {
            // Resolve names to oracle_ids via Scryfall
            const oracleIds: string[] = [];
            for (const name of names) {
                try {
                    const card: any = await Scryfall.getCardNamed(name, fuzzy);
                    const oid = (card as any)?.oracle_id || (card as any)?.oracleId || (card as any)?.oracleID;
                    if (typeof oid === "string") oracleIds.push(oid);
                } catch {
                    // ignore individual failures
                }
            }
            const uniqOids = Array.from(new Set(oracleIds));
            if (uniqOids.length === 0) return { content: [{ type: "text", text: "No oracle IDs resolved from names" }] } as any;
    
            const mapRes = await lookupCsbIdsByOracle(uniqOids);
            const ids = Object.values(mapRes.found);
            if (ids.length === 0) {
                return { structuredContent: { mapping: mapRes, results: null } } as any;
            }
            const combos = await CSB.findMyCombos(ids, limit, offset);
            return { structuredContent: { mapping: mapRes, results: combos } } as any;
        }
    );
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the multi-step process (Scryfall resolution, cached index mapping, calling find-my-combos), which adds useful context beyond basic functionality. However, it doesn't cover critical behavioral traits like error handling, performance characteristics, rate limits, or what 'find-my-combos' entails in terms of output format or limitations.

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?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded, using a single sentence that efficiently outlines the entire process. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or fluff. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (multi-step process with 4 parameters), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., combo details, error formats), how to interpret results, or handle edge cases. For a tool that involves external API calls (Scryfall) and internal mapping, more contextual information is needed to guide effective usage.

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 description coverage is low at 25%, with only the 'fuzzy' parameter documented. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what's implied by the tool name (e.g., 'names' parameter is for card names). It doesn't explain the purpose of 'limit' or 'offset', or provide usage examples. Given the low coverage, the description fails to compensate adequately, resulting in a baseline score.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: it resolves card names to IDs and finds combos. It specifies the verb 'find combos' and the resource 'by card names', distinguishing it from siblings like csb_find_combos_by_card_ids. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other search tools (e.g., search_by_function_tag), leaving some ambiguity in sibling differentiation.

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 implies usage when you have card names and want to find combos, but it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like csb_find_combos_by_card_ids or other search tools. It mentions the process (resolve names, map IDs, call find-my-combos), which gives some context, but lacks clear when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/latte-chan/scryfall-connector'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server