Skip to main content
Glama

spriteship

by com.spriteship

List character poses

list_character_poses
Read-onlyIdempotent

All poses on a character: { id, name, prompt, status pending|done|error, url, direction, pendingSince, errorCode, creditsRefunded }. This is the poll target after generate_pose — pose generation has no job id. It is also the source of ready pose ids for generate_character_animation poseFirstFrameIds / poseLastFrameIds. A pose still pending long after pendingSince is stalled, not working.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
characterIdYesCharacter id.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description reveals that pose generation has no job ID, making this the correct polling mechanism, and explains the meaning of the status fields (pending, done, error) and the stall condition. This goes beyond the annotations, which only declare read-only and idempotent hints.

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 well-structured, with each sentence providing necessary context: field list, usage scenario, and stall warning. It is concise yet complete without any redundant or irrelevant information.

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?

Given the tool's role in the generation workflow, the description covers all necessary aspects: field enumeration, status semantics, integration with generate_pose and generate_character_animation, and troubleshooting guidance for stalled poses. It is fully self-contained for a user to understand when and how to use it.

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?

The only parameter, characterId, is described in the schema as 'Character id.' The description adds no further meaning or context for this parameter, so it does not enhance understanding beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool lists all poses on a character, enumerates the returned fields, and explains its role as the poll target after generate_pose and source for generate_character_animation, distinguishing it from related tools.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: after generate_pose to poll for completion, and to fetch ready pose IDs for generate_character_animation. It also warns about interpreting 'pending long after pendingSince' as a stall, providing actionable 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