Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designers

by com.allthepossibles
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Logo colorways

logo_contrast_variants
Read-only

Pick logo colorways per background. Give colours (brand palette: hex, rgb() or hsl(), optionally named, e.g. 'Ink #14213d, Paper #fff8ec, Flame #fca311'; first is the primary), optionally logo (the colors inside the full-color logo, default the primary only) and backgrounds (default: each brand color plus white and black). For each background it reports whether the full-color logo reaches 3:1, and if not, which one-color version (a brand color, then white, then black) reaches 4.5:1 or at least 3:1, with ratios. Also suggests the set of colorways to produce.

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": {
      "colours": "<colours>"
    },
    "name": "logo_contrast_variants"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
logoNoColors used inside the full-color logo (default: the primary color)
coloursYesBrand colors, hex/rgb/hsl, optionally named. First is primary.
backgroundsNoBackgrounds to test (default: brand colors, white, black)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / backgrounds / description
      Previous value: -"Backgrounds to test (default: brand colours, white, black)"New value: +"Backgrounds to test (default: brand colors, white, black)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / colours / description
      Previous value: -"Brand colours, hex/rgb/hsl, optionally named. First is primary."New value: +"Brand colors, hex/rgb/hsl, optionally named. First is primary."
    • changedInput schema / properties / logo / description
      Previous value: -"Colours used inside the full-colour logo (default: the primary colour)"New value: +"Colors used inside the full-color logo (default: the primary color)"
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true and non-destructive, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real value: explicit contrast thresholds (3:1 full-color, 4.5:1 or 3:1 for one-color), the fallback order (brand color, then white, then black), and that it also suggests a colorway set.

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-loaded with the core purpose in one short sentence, then dense but relevant detail on inputs and outputs. Slightly long as a single paragraph, but every clause carries information.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description fully describes the return: per-background pass/fail at 3:1, recommended one-color fallback with ratios, and a suggested colorway set. Inputs and defaults are covered, so an agent has everything needed to call it.

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 enriches the schema by giving a concrete palette format example, noting the first color is primary, and restating effective defaults for logo and backgrounds.

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 ('Pick logo colorways per background') and immediately conveys a logo-specific contrast/fallback computation, which clearly separates it from generic contrast siblings like check_contrast or css_contrast_pairs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes the use case (logo colorway selection across backgrounds) evident and supplies defaults, but it never names alternatives or says when to use a sibling contrast tool (e.g. check_contrast) instead, leaving routing partly implicit.

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

All Designers toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources