Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Voidless

by dev.voidless
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

edit_image

Edit an existing image asset with an instruction (change colours, add a hat, fix a detail…). The edit is added as a new frame; the original stays. 5 credits.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "prompt": "<prompt>"
    },
    "name": "edit_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAsset ID (from list_assets / get_asset or a previous result)
imagesNoOptional extra reference images: image keys from any of your assets (get_asset lists them), or their cdn.voidless.dev URLs. Other links are refused: upload the picture first
promptYesWhat to change
frameIdNoOptional: the frame the new frames hang under in the editor (usually the frame referenceFile came from).
remove_bgNoRemove the background from the result, as the app's editor does. Set false for artwork or a scene that should keep its background
referenceFileNoWork from one image instead of the asset's base: an image key from any of your assets (as get_asset lists it), or its cdn.voidless.dev URL. Empty = the asset's current base image.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, non-idempotent), and the description genuinely adds to that: the original is preserved because the edit lands as a new frame, and each call costs 5 credits. That is real value beyond the structured fields, though it says nothing about async behaviour or what handle comes back for a non-idempotent, credit-costing operation.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the non-destructive guarantee, then the price. Every sentence carries distinct information and nothing is padded.

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 six-parameter mutation tool, the definition covers what matters most operationally: what it does to data (new frame, original intact) and what it costs. The remaining gap is the result contract — with no output schema and a check_generation sibling in the list, the agent isn't told whether an asset or frame id is returned or whether it must poll.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains id, prompt, images, frameId, remove_bg and referenceFile in more detail than the description does. The description only paraphrases prompt as "an instruction" and adds no syntax, limits (e.g. the 4-image cap), or default behaviour, so baseline 3 is right.

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?

"Edit an existing image asset with an instruction" pairs a specific verb with the resource and gives concrete instruction examples (change colours, add a hat, fix a detail), so the agent knows exactly what class of operation this is. It doesn't name a sibling such as generate_image or palette_swap to sharpen the boundary, which keeps it short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance: nothing tells the agent why it would pick this over generate_image for a fresh result, or over palette_swap / pixelate_image / add_outline for the deterministic edits that appear in the sibling list. The sentence about a new frame is a behavioral fact, not usage guidance, so the agent must infer routing from the name alone.

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

All Voidless toolsInspect
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