Colour Memory

by app.railway.up.colour-memory-api-production

Colour Specification Safety Check

colour_forensics

Read-only

Assess whether a hex colour can be safely specified for a physical application. Returns: specification_safe verdict (yes / conditional / avoid), risks, required actions, light behaviour under three illuminants (north daylight, warm artificial, direct sun), substrate-specific notes, and a recommended alternative. Backed by CIEDE2000 archive matching and Claude material knowledge. Examples: ultramarine on lime plaster, lead white on exterior timber, verdigris on north-facing interior wall, red ochre on historic brick.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hex`	Yes	Hex colour to assess e.g. '#2A5498'
`use`	No	Specific use context e.g. 'heritage repair', 'new build interior', 'conservation project'
`finish`	No	Paint finish e.g. 'matt', 'eggshell', 'gloss', 'limewash'	matt
`substrate`	Yes	Physical substrate e.g. 'lime plaster', 'gypsum board', 'brick', 'timber', 'canvas'
`orientation`	No	Room or surface orientation e.g. 'north-facing', 'south exterior', 'east bedroom'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJun 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "description": "Structured JSON response. Shape varies by tool; most return an 'ok' boolean plus a 'result' or 'results' field with the tool's data payload.",
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedJun 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "error": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "ok": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "result": {
-      "type": [
-        "object",
-        "array",
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed1 schema field changedMay 30, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "array",
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedMay 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Even with readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds substantial behavior: verdict types (yes/conditional/avoid), risks, required actions, illuminant analysis, substrate notes, and recommended alternatives. It also discloses methodology (CIEDE2000 archive matching and Claude material knowledge), going well beyond the annotation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise, with a clear front-loaded purpose and a compact list of returns. The final 'Backed by...' sentence adds credibility but is not purely functional, and the four examples are useful though slightly expand length.

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?

The description covers purpose, output categories, methodology, and concrete usage scenarios, and is paired with a full output schema and readOnlyHint. It is sufficiently complete for correct invocation despite the tool's complexity and the large sibling set.

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 100% for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific syntax or details beyond what the schema provides, though its examples reinforce valid substrate and orientation values.

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 assesses whether a hex colour can be safely specified for a physical application, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from colour_verdict or colour_metrics siblings by focusing on physical/material safety rather than generic colour analysis.

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?

It provides clear usage context: use when assessing safety for a physical substrate, reinforced by concrete examples like 'ultramarine on lime plaster' and 'lead white on exterior timber'. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, which prevents a 5.

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

All Colour Memory 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?