Skip to main content
Glama

image.style_transfer

[paid: $0.06] Apply a style to a photo while preserving the content (Nano Banana 2.1, told to change only the look). Returns JSON {images:[{url, asset_key, download_url?, width, height}], price, next} plus a preview; images are stored in this workspace, never provider links, and a result with no download_url says why in download_url_unavailable. Refuses: SIMPLER_MEDIA_INPUT_MISSING (pass the url or the asset_key), SIMPLER_MEDIA_FOREIGN_KEY (use this workspace's asset_key), SIMPLER_MEDIA_URL_REFUSED (use https, data:image or an asset_key), SIMPLER_MEDIA_PIN_TOO_LARGE (under 20MB), VALIDATION_ERROR on an empty prompt (name the look), SIMPLER_IMAGE_PROMPT_REFUSED names the label (sexual, minor, real_person or other_unsafe): rewrite the prompt without it, for example no real person's name or likeness; SIMPLER_IMAGE_PROMPT_CHECK_UNAVAILABLE (the safety check is down, nothing charged: retry later); SIMPLER_IMAGE_OUTPUT_FLAGGED (the output failed the content check and was refunded: change the prompt); SIMPLER_IMAGE_OUTPUT_SCAN_UNAVAILABLE (outputs cannot be checked right now, nothing charged: retry later), INSUFFICIENT_CREDITS (add credits). SIMPLER_EDIT_RESULT_UNDELIVERED means the charge was refunded: retry. NEXT: pass images[0].asset_key as image_asset_key to the next image.* tool, or open download_url when the result carries one.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "image.style_transfer"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptYesStyle descriptor.
image_urlNoSource photo: a public https URL, a data:image/...;base64 URL, or the url/url_path of an earlier image result (max 20MB; PNG, JPEG, WebP or GIF; SVG is refused). Pass this or the matching *_asset_key, not both.
request_refNoOptional idempotency key (1-64 chars: letters, digits, . _ : -). Retrying with the same request_ref and the same arguments within 24 hours returns the first result at $0 with replayed: true; the same request_ref with different arguments is refused (SIMPLER_IMAGE_REQUEST_REF_CONFLICT), and so is a retry whose first result was deleted since (SIMPLER_IMAGE_REQUEST_REF_RESULT_DELETED): send a new request_ref to run it again.
preview_formatNoPreview block after the JSON, at most 384px on the long edge and never charged: png, jpeg or none. Left out, a PNG result gets a png preview and a JPEG or WebP result a jpeg one. A result with no preview says why in preview_unavailable.
image_asset_keyNoSource photo, as the asset_key of an earlier image result for this workspace (edit-projects/<tenant>/... or images/<tenant>/...). A key from another workspace is refused (SIMPLER_MEDIA_FOREIGN_KEY).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries the full burden and does: price ($0.06), workspace-local storage rather than provider links, refund semantics on undelivered or flagged results, and no-charge conditions when safety scans are down. These are exactly the operational facts an agent needs before spending money.

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?

Front-loads cost and purpose, then uses explicit 'Refuses:' and 'NEXT:' labels to make the dense remainder scannable. The error enumeration is long, but each code comes with the corrective action, so the length is largely justified.

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?

With no output schema, the description still fully specifies the return payload shape ({images:[{url, asset_key, download_url?, width, height}], price, next}), the preview behavior, and every failure mode with a recovery path. Nothing material for a correct call is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents prompt, image_url, asset_key, preview_format, and request_ref in detail. The description reinforces a few points (empty prompt is refused, 20MB cap, foreign-key rejection) but adds little the schema does not already say, which is the baseline-3 case.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — apply a style to a photo while preserving content — and even names the model and the constraint (change only the look). An agent can separate this from image.variation, image.inpaint, or image.generate without opening any schema.

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?

Gives concrete routing at both ends: which input forms are accepted (url, data:image, or asset_key) and what to do next (pass images[0].asset_key to the next image.* tool, or open download_url). It does not explicitly say when to prefer image.variation or image.inpaint instead, so the sibling comparison is only implicit.

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.

Resources