Skip to main content
Glama

Colour Memory

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

Lock-and-Fill Palette from Archive

palette_generate
Read-only

Send a palette of up to 12 slots, locking some with hex values and leaving others empty. Empty slots are filled with the nearest CIEDE2000 archive match, interpolated from the locked anchors. Optional archive filter restricts fills to one archive. Returns full citation — name, archive, primary source, colour notes — for every filled slot. Example: lock a client's existing wall colour and fill a 5-colour scheme from Oxfordshire. The result already carries the rendered palette and its PNG, PDF, ASE, JSON and CSS downloads -- show them to the customer. Never present the archive anchors a colour was derived from as the colours you are recommending. If you go on to choose a final palette OF YOUR OWN from this evidence, call palette_finalize once with those exact colours so the customer can see and download what you actually recommended.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sizeNoTotal CURATED palette size 2-12 (default 5). This is the designed-palette ceiling, not a product limit on how many colours exist: for a large colour COLLECTION, page archive_search instead.
slotsYesList of palette slots. Each has index (0-11), optional hex, and locked flag.
archiveNoOptional: restrict fills to one archive e.g. 'Oxfordshire', 'Shakespeare', 'Japan'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries the behavioral burden and meets it: it discloses the interpolation method, citation output, bundled download artifacts, and the important caveat about not presenting source anchors as recommendations. 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is longer than average but every section earns its place: capability, example, output implications, and a critical usage warning. It is front-loaded with the core mechanism and ends with actionable guidance; a slight trim would make it tighter.

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?

For a tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the slot limits, fill logic, archive filtering, return contents, downloadable artifacts, and the correct next step. An agent has everything needed to invoke and interpret this tool correctly.

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 real semantic value by explaining how locked anchors drive interpolation, what 'empty' slots mean, and that the result includes rendered downloads. This goes beyond restating parameter names.

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 names a specific operation — lock hex values in a palette and fill empty slots from the archive via CIEDE2000 interpolation — which precisely distinguishes it from siblings like palette_finalize and palette_specify. The title reinforces this with 'Lock-and-Fill Palette from Archive'.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to follow up with palette_finalize, instructs not to present derived archive anchors as recommendations, and notes that large colour collections should use archive_search instead. This gives concrete selection and sequencing guidance beyond the schema.

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
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tool clusters have unclear boundaries: colour_passport, colour_dna, colour_metrics, and colour_cultural_risk overlap heavily; palette_extract, extract_image_colours, image_palette, and ingest_image cover similar image-colour extraction territory; and compound tools like design_session, image_brief, session_brief, and archive_report_brief duplicate chains of component tools. The descriptions are detailed and occasionally state 'use this instead of X', but an agent still faces many near-duplicate choices.

Naming Consistency3/5

Names are consistently snake_case and often use domain prefixes (colour_, palette_, archive_, brand_, accessibility_), but verb placement is mixed: some are verb_noun (extract_image_colours, query_hex, style_match), others are noun_verb (colour_dna, palette_generate, brand_audit), and a few standalone names (ui_states, tool_guide, meta_capabilities) don't fit either pattern. The convention is readable but not uniform.

Tool Count1/5

At 88 tools, this is far beyond the reasonable well-scoped range and exceeds the 50+ extreme mismatch threshold. Many tools are compound wrappers that consolidate chains of simpler tools, adding redundancy and cognitive load rather than genuine coverage.

Completeness5/5

For the apparent domain, the tool surface is extremely comprehensive: colour extraction, analysis, naming, accessibility, cultural/provenance research, palette generation, brand systems, interior design, ecommerce copy, image briefs, project lifecycle, exports, and diagnostic tools are all present. Persistent objects have list/get/versions/delete/export support, so there are no obvious dead ends.

Resources