Skip to main content
Glama

Set design background

set_design_background
DestructiveIdempotent

Set a full-bleed background image on one slide of an existing design, replacing any background image it already has. The image URL must be publicly reachable, for example a result from generate_image or search_media. The change is saved to the design. The response has the updated design structure (element aliases and positions) and a rendered preview.

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": {
      "workspace_key": "<workspace_key>",
      "design_id": "<design_id>",
      "slide": "<slide>",
      "image_url": "<image_url>"
    },
    "name": "set_design_background"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slideYesThe slide to add to: "frame" for a single design, or the slide alias ("s1", "s2", ...) from the design structure.
design_idYesThe design id (from compose_design or generate_post) or the key from a /designs/<key> URL.
image_urlYesURL of the background image.
workspace_keyYesKey of the workspace to act in. Call list_workspaces to see the workspaces you have access to and their keys.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true; the description adds real value on top by naming what is destroyed (the existing background image), confirming persistence ('the change is saved to the design'), and summarizing the return payload. It does not cover permission requirements, but that is the only notable gap.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its replacement behavior, with no repetition of structured fields.

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?

All four required parameters are documented in-schema and the description compensates for the absent output schema by describing the returned design structure and preview. Together with annotations, nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds semantics the schema lacks: the URL must be public/reachable and typically comes from generate_image or search_media. It also reinforces the single-slide scoping of 'slide'.

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 (set a full-bleed background image) plus precise scope (one slide of an existing design) and the replacement behavior. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like replace_design_image or add_design_shape without opening a schema.

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 the precondition that the image URL must be publicly reachable and points to concrete sibling sources (generate_image, search_media), and implies the design must already exist. It stops short of an explicit exclusion such as 'do not use this to swap an element image — use replace_design_image instead.'

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.