Colour Memory

Read-only

Show a finished colour result to the customer AS COLOUR. Call this last, once the palette, house scheme, brand system or audit you are going to hand over has been decided -- it presents what you already have and chooses nothing. Do not call it for a single contrast figure, a colour history question with no palette, or tool guidance. Send the story with it: one sentence on what the scheme IS, the design decision you made, and the one rule worth remembering. The colours cannot carry those on their own.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	palette, house, brand or audit.
`rooms`	No	For a multi-room scheme: one short line per room, in your own words. What that room is doing with the palette.
`title`	No	What this result is, in the customer's terms.
`bridge`	No	Where the evidence started and where you took it. Include `colours` on a side ONLY if you have real colour values for it -- an invented source swatch beside a real archive one reads as evidence and is not.
`checks`	No
`colours`	Yes	The colours you are handing over, in order.
`verdict`	No	One sentence, shown under the colour.
`key_rule`	No	The one rule worth remembering, short enough to repeat to a decorator. 'Boathouse Clay stays tiny. Never a wall.'
`design_move`	No	At most two sentences on the decision you made -- what the evidence offered and what you did with it. This is usually the most interesting thing in your answer and the part a list of colours cannot carry.
`proportions`	No	Only where a real share was decided. Every colour gets one and they total 100, or leave this out entirely -- a share nobody decided reads as a measurement nobody took.
`story_thesis`	No	ONE sentence: what this scheme IS. 'Danish coastal colour, domesticated for a summer house.' Shown above the palette, so it must earn its line.
`evidence_thread`	No	Three to five short sources or references that shaped this. Orientation, not a bibliography.
`evidence_summary`	No
`evidence_boundary`	No	What is source-backed and what is your interpretation. Say it plainly: 'Designed contemporary interpretation, not a measured historical paint specification.'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses key behavioral traits: the tool does not make choices, it simply presents the already-decided result, and the narrative fields must carry meaning the colours cannot. This is substantive context that helps the agent predict what the tool will and will not do.

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 compact and front-loaded. The main purpose comes first, followed by explicit call timing, exclusions, and the required story shape. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 complex, nested 14-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides the essential operational context: when to call it, what not to use it for, and what narrative fields must accompany the colours. The schema and output schema cover the structural details, so nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 high at 86%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value on top by mapping the story requirement to specific fields: one sentence on what the scheme IS (story_thesis), the design decision (design_move), and the one rule worth remembering (key_rule). This helps the agent compose the right narrative payload.

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 and resource: 'Show a finished colour result to the customer AS COLOUR.' It also differentiates this tool from siblings by saying it 'presents what you already have and chooses nothing,' making clear it is a final presentation step rather than a generation, selection, or analysis tool.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this last, once the palette, house scheme, brand system or audit... has been decided.' It also gives explicit when-not-to-use guidance: not for a single contrast figure, a colour history question with no palette, or tool guidance. This is model-level usage guidance, not just a vague hint.

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

All Colour Memory tools Inspect

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

Need Help?