Skip to main content
Glama

spriteship

by com.spriteship

Create a character

create_character

PAID (~150 credits). Generate a NEW character from a text prompt. This is the entry point for building art from nothing — call create_project first if the user has no project. IMAGE ONLY: it produces the character still, not animations. Animation is a separate explicit step (generate_character_animation for a walk cycle, generate_character_turn for the 360 rotation), because animating costs several times more and the user should choose it. SET gridRows:2 AND gridCols:2 TO REQUEST FOUR DESIGN VARIATIONS FOR THE SAME PRICE — one image call is split by complete character silhouettes, not fixed quadrants. Four is the expected count; if the provider renders additional clearly separated full characters, they are preserved as additional results. Show the user every result and let them pick. Returns { jobId, expectedCharacterCount } — poll get_job; on status:"done" its characterIds and characterPreviews tell you which characters exist and what they look like. gameType defaults from the project but can be overridden for this character. Use topdown for the Top-Down Angled character pipeline, including characters intended for isometric projects. Passing isometric is accepted as an alias and creates a topdown character because that is the measured working directional pipeline. The STORED CHARACTER gameType — not the project gameType — controls every later animation and whether a user-facing 360 turn is available. A topdown character inside a platformer project therefore keeps the top-down directional pipeline and supports generate_character_turn. DEFAULTS TO A COST PREVIEW — see the dryRun argument.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
styleNoArt-style override. Omit to inherit the project's style — usually correct, since a project should look consistent.
dryRunNoDEFAULTS TO TRUE. While true this returns only a cost quote ({ estimatedCredits, balance, spendCapDaily, spentLast24h, capRemaining }) and executes nothing. Show the user estimatedCredits and get an explicit yes for that amount, THEN re-call with dryRun:false to actually spend.
promptYesWhat the character is, e.g. "a plague doctor with a lantern". Describe the subject, not the art style.
gameTypeNoCharacter perspective override. Omit to inherit the project. Use topdown for Top-Down Angled and isometric projects; isometric is mapped to topdown. The stored value controls later animation behavior and 360-turn eligibility.
gridColsNoSet to 2 together with gridRows:2 to request 4 variations; cuts follow complete silhouettes, not quadrants.
gridRowsNoSet to 2 together with gridCols:2 to request 4 variations for the cost of one image. Logical extraction may preserve additional full characters.
projectIdYesREQUIRED. The project the character belongs to — it supplies the default gameType and style.
imageModelNoOverride the image model. Omit unless the user asked for a specific one.
cameraAngleNoCamera elevation in degrees — only meaningful for angled top-down projects.
idempotencyKeyNoOptional Idempotency-Key for the real (dryRun:false) call. Omit and one is minted per call. Reuse the SAME value when retrying a call that failed with ENTITY_BUSY / 402 / 429 so the retry cannot double-dispatch.
characterImageSizeNoAspect ratio of the generated image. Omit for the game-type default.
referenceAssetUrlsNoURLs of existing images to steer the design. URLs only — base64 is rejected by the API.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint:false and destructiveHint:false, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the ~150 credits pricing, the 2x2 grid splitting by complete silhouettes, the possibility of additional full characters being preserved, the topdown/isometric alias mapping, the fact that the stored character gameType controls later animations and 360-turn availability, and the default dryRun cost-preview behavior. The one minor gap is not explicitly saying the real (dryRun:false) call actually deducts credits, but that is well implied by the 'cost preview' explanation.

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 dense but every sentence contributes new operational information: cost, scope, image-only, grid semantics, gameType pipeline control, dryRun default, idempotency behavior, reference-asset guidance. It is slightly long and could be tightened, but the density is justified for a 12-parameter tool and the most critical facts (cost, entry point, animation separate) are front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must tell the agent what the response contains — and it does: Returns { jobId, expectedCharacterCount }, poll get_job, and on status:'done' use characterIds and characterPreviews. It also covers the game-type override, the dryRun flow, and the idempotency retry guidance for a paid mutation. A complex 12-parameter tool with no output schema is here well documented.

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 100%, so the description is not carrying the full burden. However, it adds genuine value: gridRows/gridCols are explained as costing the same as a single image and split by silhouettes rather than quadrants; the gameType is described as the stored directional-pipeline control; dryRun is given a full sequential flow; idempotencyKey is given retry semantics for ENTITY_BUSY / 402 / 429. This is above the schema-only baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Generate a NEW character from a text prompt') and a specific resource (character images). It explicitly distinguishes itself from create_project, generate_character_animation, and generate_character_turn, so an agent can immediately see what this tool does and what it does not do.

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 explicitly tells the agent to call create_project first when there is no project, to use generate_character_animation for walk cycles and generate_character_turn for 360 rotations, and to use topdown for the Top-Down Angled pipeline. It also prescribes the dryRun flow: call with dryRun:true, show the cost, get user consent, then re-call with dryRun:false. This is unusually complete usage guidance.

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

All spriteship 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, and the descriptions are extremely detailed with cross-references (e.g., animate_asset vs frame_animation vs generate_character_animation). A few pairs like reprocess_asset vs revise_asset could be confused initially, but their descriptions and use cases are explicit enough to prevent misselection.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., create_project, get_asset, cancel_job). Verbs are imperative and nouns are appropriately singular/plural, making the API predictable and readable.

Tool Count2/5

At 41 tools, the server is far beyond the 15-25 range considered reasonable for most APIs. While the domain is broad (project, assets, characters, animations, jobs, exports, credits), the sheer number creates a heavy surface that may overwhelm agents and suggests the API could be consolidated into higher-level operations.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the full creative pipeline: project creation, asset/character generation, animation (both AI and frame-based), revisions, exports, and job management. Minor gaps include lack of delete operations for assets/characters/projects and no listing of all jobs, but these are not critical for the core workflow and are likely intentional for a generative art platform.

Resources