Skip to main content
Glama

Generate Palette PDF

palette_pdf
Read-only

Generate a premium branded PDF specification sheet from a palette of archive entries. Returns a downloadable PDF with full-bleed colour panels, archive names, provenance notes, RAL nearest match, LRV, chroma, WCAG contrast data, and Colour Memory branding. Use this to create client deliverables, specification sheets, and print assets. Two supported entry sources: (1) the flat entries array from query_hex or palette_from_concept -- each item needs name, hex, archive_source, colour_notes, primary_source, zone; or (2) archive_report_brief's output -- pass report['presented_cards'] as entries, NOT report['colour_cards'] (the legacy field is kept only for backward compatibility and does not carry family-card presentation). presented_cards may mix three card shapes, all rendered as exactly one page each regardless of how many underlying records they represent: single_cultivar (a normal flat card), colour_family (card_type='colour_family', many near-identical records summarised as one card with member_count/supported_by/family_delta_e_max), and conservative-mode hero cards (a single_cultivar card carrying family_grouping_suppressed=true and also_supported_by, representing a larger natural family that was folded into one promoted cultivar instead of shown as a group). delivery controls how the PDF is returned: 'url' (default) gives a signed, time-limited R2 download link; 'base64' returns the PDF bytes inline in the response for callers that need the file directly rather than a link. Alternative input mode: pass sections instead of entries for a grouped, multi-section document (e.g. house_specify's rooms) instead of one page per flat colour card. Each section has a title, rationale, and its own entries. presentation.template picks the layout: 'sectioned_specification' (clean grid-per-section spec sheet) or 'colour_drenched_lookbook' (hero colour fills the page, swatches cover most of it, citations collected into a final appendix rather than shrunk onto every page). Third input mode: pass house (house_specify's full response object, unmodified) for the flagship document-plan pipeline -- a complete, editorial multi-archetype publication: a cover, a house_thesis argument page, a whole_house_progression chart, one room_hero + one implementation (practical specification) page per room, and a redesigned source_appendix, all sharing one design system. Takes priority over sections/entries when supplied.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
houseNoAlternative to `entries`/`sections` -- pass house_specify's full response object unmodified (house_title, house_thesis, progression, shared_house_palette, rooms) to render the complete flagship document-plan publication instead of a flat or sectioned layout. PREFER `house_ref` instead when available -- a real house response is easily 60-100KB+, which can be rejected before it reaches this API; house_ref avoids sending it at all.
queryNoOptional title for the palette e.g. Ottoman imperial luxury
sourceNoOptional source label e.g. brand, conceptualarchive
entriesNoArray of colour cards. Either the flat entries array from query_hex/palette_concept, or report['presented_cards'] from archive_report_brief (single_cultivar, colour_family, and conservative-mode hero cards are all supported -- see tool description). Omit if using `sections` instead.
deliveryNo'url' (default): signed, time-limited R2 download link. 'base64': PDF bytes returned inline as pdf_base64 for callers that need the file directly.
sectionsNoAlternative to `entries` -- one entry per document section, e.g. house_specify's rooms. Each: {title, subtitle?, rationale, grouping_basis?, hero_hex?, entries: [...colour cards...], application_notes?: [{surface, colour_name, instruction}]}.
house_refNoPreferred alternative to `house` -- the house_ref string house_specify returns in its own response (valid for 30 minutes after that call, or per project_persistence for a durable/temporary project). Renders the identical flagship document without resending the (often large) house object over the wire.
project_idNoAlternative to house_ref for an authenticated (keyed) caller's own durable project -- the project_id house_specify returned. Requires the same API key that created the project.
presentationNoUsed with `sections` or `house`. {template: 'sectioned_specification'|'colour_drenched_lookbook' (sections only), page_size?: 'A4-portrait'|'A4-landscape'|'16:9', minimum_colour_coverage?: number (default 0.55 for lookbook), source_display?: 'inline'|'appendix', max_body_words_per_page?: integer, min_body_font_pt?: number (default 10.5, rationale/application-note body text), min_label_font_pt?: number (default 9, swatch colour-name labels), min_citation_font_pt?: number (default 7.5, appendix citations and page furniture)}. No rendered text falls below its category's floor -- names that don't fit are truncated with an ellipsis, never shrunk past the floor.
project_versionNoUsed with either house_ref or project_id -- render this specific immutable version instead of the project's current version. Omit to render the current version.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations only provide readOnlyHint=true, but the description extensively discloses behavioral traits: delivery modes (url vs base64), precedence of the `house` parameter over sections/entries, how different card shapes are rendered (single_cultivar, colour_family, conservative-mode heroes), truncation with ellipsis for text overflow, and font-size floors. This exceeds the annotation by a wide margin and does not contradict the read-only hint.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is very long and dense, covering many edge cases and modes. It is logically sequenced (purpose → entry sources → delivery → sections → presentation → house), but it is a wall of text that could be better formatted with bullets or shorter paragraphs. Some details are repeated in the schema (e.g., presented_cards), adding verbosity. It is adequate for the tool's complexity but not concise.

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 10 optional parameters, multiple input modes, and a complex rendering pipeline, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers all input modes, the legacy-field warning, card-shape handling, delivery options, presentation templates, and font-size floors. Since an output schema exists, return values are adequately described, and no critical aspect of usage is left unexplained.

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% (all 10 parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds cross-parameter meaning not in the schema: the relationship between `house` and `sections`/`entries` (priority order), the distinction between `house` and `house_ref` (avoiding large payloads), and the caveat about `presented_cards` vs `colour_cards`. This elevates it beyond what each parameter description provides.

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 opens with 'Generate a premium branded PDF specification sheet from a palette of archive entries,' which clearly states the verb ('generate') and the resource ('PDF specification sheet'). It enumerates the PDF's contents (colour panels, provenance notes, RAL match, LRV, etc.) and frames it for 'client deliverables, specification sheets, and print assets,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like palette_export or palette_swatch by emphasizing the branded spec-sheet purpose.

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 tells when to use the tool ('Use this to create client deliverables, specification sheets, and print assets') and provides rich guidance on input-mode selection: entries, sections, house, house_ref, and project_id. It also warns against using the legacy colour_cards field. However, it does not mention alternative sibling tools or explicitly state when not to use this tool, so it lacks the explicit exclusions needed for a 5.

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

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