Skip to main content
Glama

spriteship

by com.spriteship

Create a project

create_project

FREE and SYNCHRONOUS (no jobId — do not poll). Creates the container everything else needs: characters and assets are created INSIDE a project, and the project's gameType is what decides how they are drawn and animated. Also seeds a starter level map, so the game preview has something real to render immediately. Call list_projects first — reuse an existing project rather than making a near-duplicate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesProject name shown in the dashboard.
styleNoOptional art-style id applied as the default for generations in this project.
gameTypeYesREQUIRED and permanent for everything in the project. platformer = side view with gravity; topdown = 4/8-direction overhead-ish (Zelda-like); topdown_overhead = straight down; isometric = 2:1 diamond; point_and_click = straight-on adventure scenes. Ask the user if it is not obvious — it changes every prompt downstream.
descriptionNoOptional project description. Feeds the prompt context for later generations.

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Discloses FREE and SYNCHRONOUS execution (no jobId), the permanent nature of gameType, and the side effect of seeding a starter level map. These additions go well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, etc.), which don't mention cost, sync/async, permanence, or map seeding.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with critical FREE/SYNCHRONOUS information. Every sentence carries unique content: creation container, gameType impact, starter map seeding, and reuse guidance. No wasted words.

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 4-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description is thorough about prerequisites, side effects, and the key gameType constraint. It doesn't describe the return value, which is a minor omission, but the overall context is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining why gameType matters—'is what decides how they are drawn and animated'—reinforcing its importance beyond the schema's enum listing. It does not add detail for name/style/description, but those are already well-documented in the schema.

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 clearly states it 'creates the container everything else needs', specifying that characters and assets are created inside a project. It distinguishes from siblings by explaining that the project is the root resource and that gameType determines how resources are drawn and animated. Mentions the starter level map side effect as part of its purpose.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call list_projects first and reuse an existing project rather than making a near-duplicate. Also frames this tool as the prerequisite for creating characters and assets, clarifying when to use it. Notes SYNCHRONOUS behavior so the agent knows not to poll.

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