# Mtg Edh Analyze > >- - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-guuse-claude-mtg-skills-mtg-edh-analyze` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [guuse](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/guuse) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** MIT - **Upstream author:** [guuse](https://github.com/guuse) - **Source:** https://github.com/guuse/claude-mtg-skills/tree/main/mtg-skills/skills/mtg-edh-analyze ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-guuse-claude-mtg-skills-mtg-edh-analyze ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About # MTG Commander Deck Analyzer & Star Rating This skill takes a Commander deck the user pastes in and **rates it out of five stars against a target bracket**, with a transparent scorecard and concrete next steps. It is the *evaluation* counterpart to the deckbuilding skills: it doesn't build (`mtg-edh-build`) or swap cards (`mtg-edh-upgrade`) — it **measures and judges**, then points at what to fix. Two principles keep the rating honest: 1. **The bracket is the benchmark, and it's determined STRICTLY.** Five stars means "matches or beats the comparable proven top lists *for this bracket*", not "a cEDH deck" and not "it works". Determine the deck's **actual** bracket from concrete signals only (Game Changer count, early two-card combos, MLD, chained extra turns, fast mana + tutor density — see `references/brackets.md`), and **report it against the target the user named.** A well-tuned, optimized deck with **0 Game Changers, no combos, no MLD** is **Bracket 2**, not 3 — being good is not a B3 signal. If the deck and its claimed bracket disagree, say so plainly (and a deck stuffed with Game Changers is not a five-star "Bracket 2" deck; it's mis-bracketed). 2. **The score is built from evidence, not vibes — and rounds DOWN when evidence is thin.** Every dimension is scored against the strict rubric in `references/rating.md`, backed by hard numbers from `scripts/analyze_deck.py`, by **reading the actual Oracle text**, and — for Staples and Synergy — against **comparison data** (EDHREC inclusion rates/ranks and comparable real lists for this commander). A deck that merely *functions* is **★★★ (3)**, not 4; 4–5 must be proven against the comparables. When you can't pull that data, default to the lower score and say so. ## Start here: paste your decklist and name a bracket - The user provides their **decklist inline** (a Moxfield/Archidekt export, a `1 Card Name` list, or a rough list), or a **Moxfield/Archidekt link** — for a link, run `scripts/import_deck.py ` to pull it via the site JSON API (it falls back to asking for a paste if the deck is private/unreachable; never invents a list). To analyze, **write the list to a temp file and run the analyzer** (see below) — the parser tolerates counts or no counts, `1x`, `(SET) 123` and `*CMDR*` markers, and section headers. - Confirm the **target bracket (1–5)** — the power level to judge the deck *against*. If the user doesn't give one, **ask**, and offer to also tell them which bracket the deck actually looks like. Default to rating at the deck's apparent bracket if they're unsure. See `references/brackets.md`. - Identify the **commander** (a `*CMDR*`/Commander-section card, or ask) and its **color identity** — needed for the legality check and for reading synergy against the right card. If the pasted list isn't ~100 cards, is malformed, or the commander is ambiguous, say what you found and confirm with the user before rating. ## How to run the analysis The bundled **`scripts/analyze_deck.py`** does the measuring; **you** do the judging. 1. Save the pasted list to a temp file (e.g. `.mtg/analysis/-input.txt`, or any temp path). 2. Run `python "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/analyze_deck.py" --commander "" --json` (add `--identity ` if you already know it). It looks every card up in the local Scryfall database and returns: total cards, land count, **mana curve**, average MV, **EDHREC-rank staple signal** (premier ≤500 / staple ≤1500 / played ≤4000 counts + median rank + unranked count), **Game Changer count**, **off-color-identity** cards, total price (Cardmarket EUR), any **cards not found**, and the **full per-card data including Oracle text and type line**. 3. **Read the per-card Oracle text** to classify each card's role (land / ramp / card advantage / interaction / board wipe / synergy / wincon) and to **score synergy** — `analyze_deck.py` gives the objective stats, but classification and synergy are judgment calls that need the wording. Use `scryfall_search.py` for anything extra: `--named "Card"` for a card's exact text, `function:ramp id` / `function:removal …` / `is:gamechanger id` to spot staples the deck is *missing*. 4. **Pull the comparable real decklists** so the Staples and Synergy dimensions are scored against *evidence*, not opinion: `python "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/edhrec_fetch.py" ""` (top/staple + high-synergy cards with inclusion rates), `--average` (the average ~100-card list), and `--theme`/`--budget` for variants. Compare the deck's contents to these inclusion rates: which high-inclusion staples it runs vs. misses, and whether its engine is as dense as the proven lists. If EDHREC is unreachable, say so and treat proven-inclusion claims as lower-confidence — and rate **down** accordingly (`references/rating.md`). If the database can't be built or reached, fall back to `web_search`/`web_fetch` of Scryfall pages (and say prices/newest cards are unverified), or to known MTG knowledge — but prefer the local DB; it's what makes the staple and curve signals reliable. ## Score it: the five-dimension rubric Apply the rubric in **`references/rating.md`** (read it). Score each dimension 1–5 (half-stars allowed), then combine by weight and apply the gates: 1. **Structure & consistency** *(30%)* — lands ~37–38, ramp ~10–11, **≥12 net-positive card advantage**, ~10 interaction + 2–4 wipes, a curve with only 3–4 cards at MV 6+. The fundamentals that win games. 2. **Synergy density** *(25%)* — via `references/synergy.md`: what fraction of non-structural cards clear the **≥2–3 points of contact** bar, the average contact count, and whether engines reinforce each other. 3. **Staples & card quality** *(20%)* — scored against **comparison data**: the EDHREC-rank signal **and** the inclusion rates of the comparable lists. Does it run the high-inclusion pieces its plan wants, at the rate the proven lists do, and what high-inclusion cards is it missing? Scaled to bracket (B1–2 lenient, B3–5 demanding); round down when the data is thin. 4. **Win conditions & closing power** *(15%)* — 3–4 real, repeatable, resilient ways to actually end the game from a normal board (one unremarkable wincon is a 3, not a 4). 5. **Bracket calibration** *(10%, partial gate)* — determine the **actual** bracket from the signals (Game Changer count, early combos, MLD, chained extra turns, fast mana + tutor density) and compare to the target. Actual target/violation is **mis-bracketed** → report the real bracket and cap the score. See `references/brackets.md`. `overall = 0.30·structure + 0.25·synergy + 0.20·staples + 0.15·wincons + 0.10·bracket`, rounded to the nearest half-star, then capped by the gates in `references/rating.md` — note the **"it just functions" ceiling of ★★★** (4+ must be earned against comparable lists), plus the caps for a dimension at 1, a missing fundamental, or a mis-bracket. ## The deliverable Hand back a **rating report** in the conversation: 1. **Headline** — e.g. `★★★½ (3.5/5) — a solid Bracket 2 deck`, plus the **actual bracket** stated against the target if they differ (e.g. "you asked for B3; as built it's B2"). 2. **Scorecard** — the five dimensions, each with its stars and the **numbers/evidence behind it** (show the analyzer's stats and inclusion-rate comparisons: "Structure ★★★ — 37 lands, 11 ramp, 13 draw, 9 interaction + 3 wipes; on target but not tighter than the comparable lists, so 3"). 3. **Strengths (2–3)** and **weaknesses (2–3)** — concrete, each tied to a dimension and, where possible, to comparison data. 4. **Move-up / move-down note** — what would raise the deck one bracket and what would drop it (`references/brackets.md`). 5. **Highest-impact fixes (3–5)** — cheapest-first changes that would raise the score most, and an **offer to hand off to `mtg-edh-upgrade`** to actually make the swaps (carry over the diagnosis). Keep it honest and specific, and **err toward the lower score when evidence is thin** — "card advantage is thin (9, want 12+); EDHREC lists average 14" beats "could be better". **Saving the report is optional — write a file only if the user asks.** When they do, save it as `.mtg/analysis/.md` in the resolved workspace (slug = commander name, kebab-case) and share it with `present_files`. Don't write decks or import lists here — that's the upgrade skill's job. ## The `.mtg` workspace This skill mostly reads; it writes only the temp input file and (on request) a report. Its I/O lives in the same **workspace** the other MTG skills use, resolved in this order: 1. **`$MTG_HOME`**, if set — the user's portable data location (e.g. a private `mtg-data` git repo; see `SYNCING.md`). Use it even if subfolders don't exist yet — create them. 2. Otherwise the nearest **`.mtg/`** at or above the current working directory (conventionally git-ignored). Run `python "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/scripts/scryfall_search.py" --paths` to print the resolved paths; analysis files go in a sibling `analysis/` folder. If `$MTG_HOME` is unset and there's no clear working directory and the user wants a file saved, ask where the workspace should live first; a pure in-chat rating that writes only a temp file doesn't need this. If a `collection/` file exists, you can note which suggested fixes the user already owns. **Scryfall reads come from the local card database** (`scripts/analyze_deck.py` and `scripts/scryfall_search.py` both read `.mtg/database/cards.sqlite`, built from Scryfall bulk data — see the **mtg-db** skill; built automatically on first use, one-time ~540 MB). If it reports the data is **stale (>30 days)**, mention prices and the staple signal may have shifted and **ask** whether to refresh first. `function:`/`otag:` (Tagger) queries route to the live API automatically. ## Quality bar before you hand it over - **Every dimension score is backed by the analyzer's numbers and by Oracle text you actually read** — the synergy score in particular names specific high-contact and zero-contact cards, not a guess. - **The headline rating is consistent with the rubric and the gates** (`references/rating.md`) — a deck missing a fundamental or breaking its bracket isn't quietly handed four stars. - **Bracket is reported two ways** when they differ: the rating *as the target bracket*, and the deck's *actual* bracket placement. - **Color identity is checked** — `analyze_deck.py` flags off-identity cards; surface any (one off-identity pip makes a card illegal in the deck) and any cards not found in the database (so the user can fix typos). - **The fixes are concrete, prioritized, and cheapest-first**, with an offer to hand off to `mtg-edh-upgrade`. ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [guuse](https://github.com/guuse) - **Source:** [guuse/claude-mtg-skills](https://github.com/guuse/claude-mtg-skills) - **License:** MIT Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-guuse-claude-mtg-skills-mtg-edh-analyze - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/guuse - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.