Skip to main content
Glama

transferMotion

Transfer motion from a reference video or a named animation preset onto a static sprite image, producing an animated spritesheet that mimics the reference movement. Provide the sprite as image (URL or base64) plus either a video URL or a preset_id together with perspective and direction. The job result is a single sprite result directly (spritesheet URL, plus optional GIF, individual frames, or with-background spritesheet when requested) with no polling step. It returns HTTP 400 if neither a video nor a complete preset_id/perspective/direction triple is supplied, if the named preset, perspective, or direction cannot be resolved, or if the model/duration combination is invalid. Credits are charged only on success, based on the spritesheet's actual produced duration (which may be shorter than requested if the reference video is shorter). Use this when you have an existing motion clip or preset to copy; prefer animateSprite to generate animation purely from a text prompt, and call listAnimationPresets first to get valid preset_id, perspective, and direction values. Pass an optional request_id to tag the result so you can retrieve it later via GET /assets/sprites/results. Requires an API key (user scope). Returns 202 with a job id immediately; poll getApiJob (pass wait: 30) until status is succeeded, then read its result field, which is exactly the response documented for this operation. Each account may have up to 50 generations queued or running at once; beyond that submissions return 429 (PENDING_JOBS_LIMIT) - wait for jobs to finish.

Credits: cost varies by model and duration (credits/sec): Forge 2/s (min 4), Forge Pixel 2/s (min 4), Tango 4/s (min 4); see this endpoint's full pricing table in the API docs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestBodyYesPayload for transferring motion from a video onto a static sprite image, producing an animated spritesheet.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description contains a direct contradiction: it states 'with no polling step' but later instructs to 'poll getApiJob' and 'wait: 30'. This is misleading and fails to transparently describe the asynchronous job-polling behavior, which is critical for client interaction. The contradictory statements undermine trust in the description's accuracy.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is overly long and redundant, repeating credit information twice and including a contradictory polling statement. While it is somewhat organized, the redundancy and internal inconsistency make it less concise and structurally flawed.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers many aspects such as error codes, rate limits, and credit pricing, but the polling contradiction leaves the response handling ambiguous. Although it later provides the correct polling procedure, the inconsistent statement reduces the overall completeness and reliability.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description provides extra context beyond the schema, such as 'Videos up to 4 seconds will produce better results' and the conditional requirement that either 'video' or 'preset_id + perspective + direction' must be provided. It clarifies relationships and best practices, significantly enhancing parameter understanding.

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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: transferring motion from a video or preset onto a static sprite to produce an animated spritesheet. It also contrasts with the sibling animateSprite tool, which generates purely from text. This provides a precise and unambiguous purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says to use this tool when an existing motion clip or preset is available, and to prefer animateSprite for text-based generation. It also advises calling listAnimationPresets first to obtain valid preset values, giving clear guidance on when and how to use the tool versus alternatives.

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.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools pair a clear action and asset type (create3DModel, editVideo, removeBackground), and overlapping pairs such as animateSprite vs transferMotion vs animateSpriteKeyframes are carefully differentiated by input mode. The main friction is listApiJobs vs listGenerations, which both return generation history from slightly different scopes.

Naming Consistency4/5

The set is overwhelmingly consistent camelCase verb+noun (create*, edit*, list*, animate*, cancel*), with only minor deviations like generatePose/generateWithStyle alongside createImage and the slightly awkward validateApiKeyEndpoint. There is no chaotic mixing of conventions.

Tool Count2/5

At 31 tools this exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many', even though the multimodal game-asset scope explains much of the breadth. Agents face a large selection surface with many generation variants across 3D, sprites, images, audio, and video.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows are covered: image-to-3D plus rigging and animation, sprite pose/rotation/animation/editing, image create/edit/style/background-removal, video create/edit/upscale, and audio SFX/ambiance/music/voice. Minor gaps remain, such as no image upscaler and no individual asset retrieval or deletion.