Nano Studio Pro

Restyle an image

restyle

Edits an existing image with AI. COSTS CREDITS (generate_* pricing, like generate_image). Always creates a NEW generation; the original is untouched. Modes: plain-text edit (just instructions); one-click product placement (action bring + reference_id — places the reference's product into the scene at true scale, relit); recolor/remove/add items (use get_detections for item names); merge two images (merge_bias 0=reference dominates, 100=base dominates); art-style transfer (action style + style_intensity 0-100). reference_id can be an asset OR a generation you own. @slug in the prompt or entity_ids attach a saved entity's sheet (list_entities).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`items`	No	Items by name (every instance) or, remove only, by get_detections id (that one instance). Required for remove.
`action`	No	Default bring.
`scan_id`	No	The scan_id item ids came from. Default newest.
`asset_id`	No	An uploaded asset as the base instead; never both.
`entity_ids`	No
`merge_bias`	No	merge only: 0 reference dominates - 100 base dominates. Default 50.
`project_id`	Yes	Project for the result.
`resolution`	No
`blend_level`	No	add only: 0 raw composite - 100 fully unified. Default 50.
`merge_scope`	No	merge only. Default scene.
`aspect_ratio`	No
`instructions`	No	Free-text edit instructions.
`reference_id`	No	Asset or generation to take the product/colors/style/content from.
`generation_id`	No	The base photo to edit (or asset_id).
`style_intensity`	No	style only: 0 subtle tint - 100 full reimagine. Default 75.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / items / description

Previous value: -"Item names to target (from get_detections). Required for remove."New value: +"Items by name (every instance) or, remove only, by get_detections id (that one instance). Required for remove."

addedInput schema / properties / items / items / properties / id
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "integer"
+}
```
removedInput schema / properties / items / items / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "name"
-]
```

addedInput schema / properties / scan_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "The scan_id item ids came from. Default newest.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 13, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / asset_id

Added value: +{
+  "description": "An uploaded asset as the base instead; never both.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / generation_id / description

Previous value: -"The base photo to edit."New value: +"The base photo to edit (or asset_id)."

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "generation_id",
-  "project_id"
-]New value: +[
+  "project_id"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedSep 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / entity_ids

Added value: +{
+  "items": {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedSep 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the costly, credit-consuming nature ('COSTS CREDITS (generate_* pricing)') and, importantly, that the original is never mutated ('Always creates a NEW generation; the original is untouched'). It also discloses source ambiguity for reference_id (asset OR owned generation), which structured fields do not convey.

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?

It is a single dense paragraph, but it is front-loaded with the two highest-stakes facts (cost and non-destructiveness) and each clause adds distinct operational detail. The run-on density and packed mode list cost it the top mark.

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?

For a 15-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers all five modes, the cost model, non-destructive semantics, and reference/entity sourcing. It omits output shape (acceptable without an output schema) and defaults for resolution/aspect_ratio, but an agent could call it correctly from this text.

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 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters, but the description adds real meaning: it maps actions to required companions, gives merge_bias direction (0=reference, 100=base), and explains that entity_ids/@slug attach a saved entity's sheet. It leaves resolution, aspect_ratio, and blend_level to the schema, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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+resource ('Edits an existing image with AI') and then enumerates the distinct modes (plain-text edit, product placement, recolor/remove/add, merge, style transfer), which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like generate_image, expand_image, and cutout. It also names adjacent tools (get_detections, list_entities, generate_image) so the boundary is explicit.

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?

Gives per-mode selection rules ('action bring + reference_id' for placement, 'action style + style_intensity' for style transfer) and routes the agent to alternatives where needed ('use get_detections for item names', 'list_entities' for entity sheets). This is explicit when-to-use guidance rather than inference.

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

All Nano Studio Pro tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?