AnimeAPI

Generate anime image

generate_anime_image

Generate one anime-style image from a text prompt and return its URL. Models: anime (cheapest, best for characters; prompt is rewritten into anime-style tags), ultra (follows long sentences, renders legible text), ultra-max (highest detail). Prices per image: anime $0.003, ultra $0.01, ultra-max $0.02. Takes about 4s on anime, 10-13s on ultra tiers.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "generate_anime_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	No	Quality tier.	anime
`prompt`	Yes	What to draw, in plain English.
`enhance`	No	anime model only: rewrite the prompt into anime-style tags before generating.
`orientation`	No		portrait

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	Yes
`cost_usd`	Yes
`image_url`	Yes
`balance_usd`	Yes
`orientation`	Yes
`enhanced_prompt`	Yes
`generation_time_ms`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the description's real contribution is cost per image ($0.003/$0.01/$0.02) and expected latency (4s vs 10-13s), which materially affect how an agent should choose and retry. It does not disclose retention of generated images or rate limits, which would matter given idempotentHint=false means repeat calls cost money.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return value, followed by model/cost/latency tradeoffs in a scannable list-like structure. No filler or restatement of the tool title.

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?

Output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and the definition still covers purpose, cost, latency, and tier tradeoffs. Gaps remain on the orientation parameter and on whether repeated calls bill again or images persist, which is notable for a non-idempotent paid generation tool.

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?

Adds meaning beyond the 75%-covered schema for the most consequential parameter: the model tiers are explained by cost, speed, and behavioral traits (prompt rewriting, legible text). The enhance behavior is reinforced ('prompt is rewritten into anime-style tags'), but orientation is never mentioned in the description and has no schema description, leaving that parameter unexplained.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Generate one anime-style image from a text prompt') and names the return value ('return its URL'). This clearly separates it from the video siblings generate_anime_video and get_anime_video without needing their schemas.

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 selection criteria among the three tiers: anime for characters, ultra for long sentences and legible text, ultra-max for highest detail, each with cost and latency. It stops short of explicit exclusions or routing (e.g., use the video tool for motion), so it is strong context rather than full when/when-not guidance.

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

All AnimeAPI tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?