Colour Memory

Lock-and-Fill Palette from Archive

palette_generate

Read-only

Send a palette of up to 12 slots, locking some with hex values and leaving others empty. Empty slots are filled with the nearest CIEDE2000 archive match, interpolated from the locked anchors. Optional archive filter restricts fills to one archive. Returns full citation — name, archive, primary source, colour notes — for every filled slot. Example: lock a client's existing wall colour and fill a 5-colour scheme from Oxfordshire. The result already carries the rendered palette and its PNG, PDF, ASE, JSON and CSS downloads -- show them to the customer. Never present the archive anchors a colour was derived from as the colours you are recommending. If you go on to choose a final palette OF YOUR OWN from this evidence, call palette_finalize once with those exact colours so the customer can see and download what you actually recommended.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`size`	No	Total CURATED palette size 2-12 (default 5). This is the designed-palette ceiling, not a product limit on how many colours exist: for a large colour COLLECTION, page archive_search instead.
`slots`	Yes	List of palette slots. Each has index (0-11), optional hex, and locked flag.
`archive`	No	Optional: restrict fills to one archive e.g. 'Oxfordshire', 'Shakespeare', 'Japan'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description reveals meaningful behavior: empty slots are interpolated from locked anchors via CIEDE2000, every filled slot includes a citation, and the result carries rendered palette files with PNG, PDF, ASE, JSON, and CSS downloads. It also discloses an important usage constraint about not presenting archive anchors as recommended colours.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: mechanics, filtering, citation output, rendered downloads, customer presentation, a safety warning, and finalize routing. It is front-loaded with the core operation and expands only with high-value usage guidance.

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?

The description covers what the tool does, how its main parameters behave, what the result includes, how to present it, what to avoid, and what to do next if the agent makes its own final palette choice. With an output schema present, the description is more than complete enough for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds substantial meaning: slot locking semantics, interpolation from locked anchors, the 12-slot ceiling, the archive filter behavior, and a worked example of locking a client colour and filling a 5-colour scheme from Oxfordshire. This goes well beyond the bare parameter descriptions.

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?

Description names a specific operation: sending a palette with locked hex slots and auto-filling empty slots from CIEDE2000 archive matches. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like palette_finalize and archive_search by describing its unique lock-and-fill mechanism rather than just restating the tool name.

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 when to call palette_finalize instead ('If you go on to choose a final palette OF YOUR OWN... call palette_finalize once'), and the schema notes archive_search for large colour collections. It also provides a concrete example and warns against presenting derived archive anchors as recommendations.

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

All Colour Memory tools Inspect

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

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation2/5

With 88 tools, there is substantial overlap: colour_passport vs colour_dna vs colour_metrics vs colour_cultural_risk are explicit components of the same object; palette_concept vs palette_strict vs palette_generate vs palette_heritage overlap heavily; and four image extraction tools exist (extract_image_colours, image_palette, palette_extact, ingest_image). Although descriptions are detailed and tool_guide exists, an agent will frequently struggle to select the correct tool unambiguously.

Naming Consistency5/5

Nearly all tools follow a consistent snake_case noun_verb or domain-prefixed pattern (colour_*, palette_*, brand_*, archive_*, project_*, accessibility_*). The naming is uniform and predictable, with no mixing of styles or verb conventions across the set.

Tool Count1/5

88 tools is an extreme count for an MCP server. Even honoring the broad domain, the rubric places 50+ at the extreme end, and the high overlap between compound and individual tools suggests many could be consolidated or exposed as sub-resources rather than top-level tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full colour lifecycle: lookup, analysis, palettes, brand systems, accessibility, image extraction, interior design, archival research, reports, PDF generation, and project management. Workflows have clear entry points and few dead ends, and the presence of compound tools further closes integration gaps.

Resources

Need Help?