Skip to main content
Glama

Colour Memory

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

Trace a Colour Concept Through History

colour_timeline
Read-only

Given a concept or colour name, traces its documented appearances across cultures and centuries in chronological order. Returns a dated sequence of archive entries showing when and where the colour appeared, with primary sources. Use for historical research, provenance chains, and understanding why a colour carries the cultural weight it does. Example: 'indigo' traces from ancient Indian trade routes through Roman imports to Tudor sumptuary law to synthetic aniline displacement in 1897.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nNoNumber of timeline entries to return (default 10, max 20)
conceptYesColour name or concept to trace e.g. indigo, imperial purple, mourning black

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / concept
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Colour name or concept to trace e.g. indigo, imperial purple, mourning black",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / hex
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Hex value to trace through history",
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / n
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 10,
+  "description": "Number of timeline entries to return (default 10, max 20)",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / tolerance
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": 20,
-  "description": "dE2000 tolerance for matching (default 20)",
-  "type": "integer"
-}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "hex"
-]New value: +[
+  "concept"
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • 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"
+}
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "error": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "ok": {
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "result": {
-      "type": [
-        "object",
-        "array",
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "result": {
+      "type": [
+        "object",
+        "array",
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "hex": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "summary": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "timeline": {
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "archive_source": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "colour_notes": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "distance": {
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "hex": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "name": {
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "primary_source": {
-            "type": "string"
-          }
-        },
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  6. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explaining that the output is a dated sequence of archive entries with primary sources, emphasizing chronological ordering and cultural/historical scope. It does not mention limitations like pagination or failure cases, but with the annotation and output schema, this is sufficient. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the tool's core function. Each sentence earns its place, including the illustrative example that clarifies the concept and shows the historical trace. It is appropriately sized without unnecessary filler.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 params, 1 required), full schema coverage, existing output schema, and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers purpose, usage, return format, and an example, leaving no significant gaps.

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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (concept and n) with 100% coverage. The description adds an example (indigo) that illustrates the concept parameter, but does not provide additional syntax or semantic details beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 function: given a concept or colour name, it traces documented appearances chronologically across cultures and centuries, returning dated archive entries with primary sources. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like colour_story or archive_provenance, and includes a concrete example for the 'indigo' concept.

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?

The description explicitly says 'Use for historical research, provenance chains, and understanding why a colour carries the cultural weight it does.' This provides clear context on when to use the tool, but does not explicitly list alternative tools or exclusions, which would merit 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 toolsInspect
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