Skip to main content
Glama

Colour Memory

by com.colourmemory.api

Translate Any Palette into a Named Archive

palette_translate
Read-only

Map any list of hex values into a target archive using CIEDE2000 nearest-neighbour matching. Each input hex is matched to the closest named colour in the chosen archive, with a delta-e relevance band (exact / close / approximate / loose) and full provenance. Use to translate a client's paint colours into Shakespeare language, map a brand palette into historical Japanese pigments, or find the nearest Oxfordshire equivalents to a French scheme. 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
paletteYesList of hex values to translate e.g. ['#F5F0E8', '#8B6B3D']
max_delta_eNoMax acceptable CIEDE2000 distance — above this is flagged out-of-threshold (default 40)
target_archiveYesArchive to translate into e.g. 'Shakespeare', 'Japan', 'Oxfordshire'

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?

Even with readOnlyHint=true, the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the delta-e relevance band, provenance, the result already containing rendered palette and downloadable formats, and the critical warning not to present derived anchor colours as recommendations. This goes well beyond the annotation.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core action and method, then provides usage examples and an essential safety instruction. Every sentence adds value; there is no repetitive or filler content despite covering several behaviors.

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 moderately complex tool with a full input schema and output schema, the description covers what it does, how it behaves, what the result includes, and how the agent should handle the output afterwards. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation and downstream behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the purpose of palette and target_archive with examples and mentions the delta-e concept, but it does not substantially expand on max_delta_e beyond the schema's default and threshold explanation.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource ('Map any list of hex values into a target archive') plus the algorithm (CIEDE2000 nearest-neighbour matching), making it distinct from the many sibling palette tools. It also names the follow-up sibling palette_finalize, reinforcing what this tool is and is not.

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?

The description gives concrete use cases ('translate a client's paint colours into Shakespeare language, map a brand palette into historical Japanese pigments, or find the nearest Oxfordshire equivalents') and explicitly says when to call palette_finalize instead of presenting derived anchors as recommendations. This clearly routes an agent to the correct tool and next step.

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

A3.6/5.0
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