Colour Memory

Read-only

Show a finished colour result to the customer AS COLOUR. Call this last, once the palette, house scheme, brand system or audit you are going to hand over has been decided -- it presents what you already have and chooses nothing. Do not call it for a single contrast figure, a colour history question with no palette, or tool guidance. Send the story with it: one sentence on what the scheme IS, the design decision you made, and the one rule worth remembering. The colours cannot carry those on their own.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	No	palette, house, brand or audit.
`rooms`	No	For a multi-room scheme: one short line per room, in your own words. What that room is doing with the palette.
`title`	No	What this result is, in the customer's terms.
`bridge`	No	Where the evidence started and where you took it. Include `colours` on a side ONLY if you have real colour values for it -- an invented source swatch beside a real archive one reads as evidence and is not.
`checks`	No
`colours`	Yes	The colours you are handing over, in order.
`verdict`	No	One sentence, shown under the colour.
`key_rule`	No	The one rule worth remembering, short enough to repeat to a decorator. 'Boathouse Clay stays tiny. Never a wall.'
`design_move`	No	At most two sentences on the decision you made -- what the evidence offered and what you did with it. This is usually the most interesting thing in your answer and the part a list of colours cannot carry.
`proportions`	No	Only where a real share was decided. Every colour gets one and they total 100, or leave this out entirely -- a share nobody decided reads as a measurement nobody took.
`story_thesis`	No	ONE sentence: what this scheme IS. 'Danish coastal colour, domesticated for a summer house.' Shown above the palette, so it must earn its line.
`evidence_thread`	No	Three to five short sources or references that shaped this. Orientation, not a bibliography.
`evidence_summary`	No
`evidence_boundary`	No	What is source-backed and what is your interpretation. Say it plainly: 'Designed contemporary interpretation, not a measured historical paint specification.'

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this: 'presents what you already have and chooses nothing.' It also warns that colours alone cannot carry the story, shaping expected behavior around narrative enrichment. It adds useful context without contradicting the annotation.

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 sentences cover purpose, positioning, exclusions, and required narrative content with no filler. The most important constraint, 'calls last' and 'chooses nothing,' is front-loaded, and every sentence adds operational value.

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?

For a presentation tool with 14 parameters, the schema already documents the wide surface area at 86% coverage. The description supplies the missing contextual layer: when to call it, what makes it different, what to include, and what to avoid. Nothing essential for correct invocation is left unclear.

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 high at 86%, so the schema carries most parameter detail. The description still adds value by routing the agent to three specific narrative fields: one sentence on what the scheme IS, the design decision, and one rule worth remembering — matching story_thesis, design_move, and key_rule. It makes the purpose of those parameters clearer than the schema alone.

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 and resource: 'Show a finished colour result to the customer AS COLOUR.' It also distinguishes the tool from decision-making tools by saying it 'presents what you already have and chooses nothing,' making its role unambiguous even among many colour-related siblings.

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 gives explicit timing guidance: 'Call this last, once the palette, house scheme, brand system or audit ... has been decided.' It also names clear exclusion cases: a single contrast figure, a colour history question with no palette, or tool guidance. This is strong when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance.

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?