OneSimpleAPI

GET|HEAD /api/image-recipes

api_get_image_recipes

Destructive

GET lists account-owned recipes; PUT saves a name and options. No image generation or image credit charge. Uses the OneSimpleAPI API (https://onesimpleapi.com/docs), with the same permissions, credits and storage. Supply API parameters in query or body. method defaults to GET. Outputs preserve HTTP status, headers and JSON/text/base64 body; redirects are returned without following them.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "api_get_image_recipes"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`body`	No	API request body. Nested objects, arrays, HTML, base64 data and all API options retain their original meaning.
`path`	No
`files`	No	Multipart uploads keyed by API field name (for example pdf). Supply file_name, base64 bytes and optional mime_type. Uploads use the existing API file validators.
`query`	No	URL query parameters. Sensitive API options must be in body as documented by the API.
`method`	No
`headers`	No	API request headers such as Idempotency-Key, Range and If-None-Match. Authentication and transport headers are managed by the connection.
`content_type`	No	Defaults to application/json, or multipart/form-data when files are supplied.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, destructive, open-world behavior, yet the description adds real context: no image generation or credit charge, shared permissions/credits/storage, that HTTP status/headers and JSON/text/base64 bodies are preserved, and that redirects are returned unfollowed. It does not explain what could be destructive given a listing operation, leaving a gap against destructiveHint=true.

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 compact and front-loads the core GET behavior before the operational notes. The PUT clause is misplaced in a GET-only tool and the OneSimpleAPI boilerplate is expendable, but most sentences earn their place.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains output preservation and redirect handling, and it covers cost and permission expectations for a nested, open-world proxy tool. What it omits is pagination/listing limits and a clear hand-off to the PUT sibling for mutations.

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 71% and already documents name, options, headers, files and content_type, so the schema carries most of the load. The description adds only the query-vs-body placement rule and the GET default, and its PUT/method claim is inconsistent with the GET/HEAD-only enum.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

It names a specific verb and resource plus scope: 'GET lists account-owned recipes'. However, the sentence 'PUT saves a name and options' describes a sibling operation (api_put_image_recipes) that this tool's method enum (GET/HEAD only) cannot perform, which muddies rather than sharpens the purpose.

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?

Usage is implied by the listing scope and by the note that no credits are charged, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or routing to the PUT sibling for saving recipes. The agent must infer that saving goes elsewhere.

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

All OneSimpleAPI 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?