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

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With only readOnlyHint as annotation, the description carries a heavy load and delivers. It discloses delivery mechanisms (signed time-limited URL vs base64), rendering behavior (each card exactly one page regardless of underlying records), card-shape nuances, and the full house pipeline. This goes well beyond annotations and provides critical execution context.

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 long (over 300 words) but well-structured, moving from purpose to output details to input modes. Each sentence contributes new information, and the key points are front-loaded. It is not as tight as it could be, but the tool's complexity justifies the length, so a 4 fits.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers all three input modes, delivery options, presentation templates, and card-shape behaviors. However, it omits the house_ref/project_id shortcut that the schema describes, which is an important alternative to avoid sending large payloads. Given the rich schema, the description is still quite complete, but this omission prevents a 5.

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?

Because schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3. The description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema by detailing required entry fields (name, hex, archive_source, etc.), the three card shapes and their implications, and the structure of `sections`. It does not fully compensate for the schema's high coverage, but it does enhance understanding significantly, so a 4 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Generate a premium branded PDF specification sheet from a palette of archive entries.' It also enumerates the PDF's contents (colour panels, provenance, RAL, LRV, WCAG data), making its primary purpose unmistakable. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling palette_export, but the specificity and scope are clear enough to qualify as distinguishing.

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 states when to use the tool: 'Use this to create client deliverables, specification sheets, and print assets.' It provides detailed input-mode guidance, warns against using report['colour_cards'] instead of presented_cards, and explains the priority of `house` over `sections`/`entries`. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tool clusters perform near-identical functions: extract_image_colours, image_palette and palette_extract all extract dominant colours from images; colour_passport, colour_dna, colour_metrics and colour_cultural_risk all profile a single hex; and at least six compound 'complete package' tools (agent_brief, archive_report_brief, brand_report, design_session, image_brief, session_brief) overlap heavily in scope. The descriptions try to differentiate -- some even point to tool_guide for routing -- but the volume and similarity of clusters makes misselection likely.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear domain_prefix_suffix pattern (colour_, palette_, archive_, brand_, accessibility_, project_) and within families naming is very disciplined (brand_guideline_specify/select/pdf/claims/status, project_get/list/versions/delete). However, a handful of outliers invert the order (extract_image_colours, ingest_image, render_colour_result, query_hex) and some descriptions reference tools that don't exist as endpoints (palette_from_concept, match_paint_system, get_colour_metrics).

Tool Count1/5

88 tools is far beyond any reasonable single-server surface, even for a platform spanning archives, branding, interiors and accessibility. The sheer number forces agents into a massive decision space, and many tools exist purely as convenience wrappers that replace chains of 3-6 other tools, suggesting aggressive consolidation was needed.

Completeness4/5

The surface covers an unusually broad domain -- archive search, colour science, palettes, branding, interiors, accessibility, image extraction, projects, and PDF/Word/Excel exports -- with very few dead ends for end-user workflows. Minor gaps: several compound-tool descriptions reference tools that no longer exist, and valid archive names are only discoverable via error messages rather than a dedicated listing endpoint.

Resources