Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Designesy

by io.github.LE-VAI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Validate Lottie animation

designesy_motion_score
Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate one Lottie animation file against the Designesy motion contract: its ten checks (m01-m10), drawn from the Lottie spec v1.0.1 and the Designesy §16 Ten Non-Negotiable Motion Standards. Each check returns PASS, FAIL, WARN or SKIP under the contract's own name for its id: m01 the schema's top-level animation object (layer contents are not validated, so a clean file returns SKIP, not PASS), m02 the required fields (v, fr, ip, op, w, h, layers), m03 no deprecated 4.x Bodymovin version, m04 a markers array, m05 a meta object, m06 a reduced-motion path (a marker or slot named for it, or a meta note of an external prefers-reduced-motion wrapper), m07 keyframe easing (linear, ease and ease-in curves fail), m08 duration within 300 ms (longer returns WARN, since a justification cannot be read from a file), m09 layout-property animation and m10 keyboard-initiated motion (both SKIP: they concern the page that embeds the file). Use this to check that a motion asset is well formed and carries reduced-motion support. When NOT to use: for the motion CSS of a whole site, use designesy_score. Executable: fetches the URL or parses the inline JSON; no browser needed. Score: PASS=1, WARN=0.5, FAIL=0, SKIP is not scored; points / scored checks x 100. Returns JSON: { contract_id, contract_version, contract_status, url, lottie_version, layer_count, score (0-100), grade (A-F), pass_count, fail_count, warn_count, skip_count, scoring, checks[{id (m01-m10), name, status (PASS, FAIL, WARN or SKIP), detail}], ten_non_negotiable, provenance, validator_note }. Pass url to fetch a remote Lottie file, or lottie_file to validate an inline JSON string. Provide exactly one.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "designesy_motion_score"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoURL to a Lottie JSON file of up to 16 MiB. The tool fetches and validates it; a longer file fails with an error that names the limit.
lottie_fileNoRaw Lottie JSON string to validate (alternative to url).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Previous value: -"URL to a Lottie JSON file. The tool fetches and validates it."New value: +"URL to a Lottie JSON file of up to 16 MiB. The tool fetches and validates it; a longer file fails with an error that names the limit."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses that the tool executes (fetches the URL or parses inline JSON, no browser needed), defines the scoring formula, and explains the non-obvious SKIP semantics (m01 SKIP on clean files, m08 WARN capped at 300 ms, m09/m10 SKIP because they concern the embedding page). That is exactly the behavioral context an agent cannot get from structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause and nothing is filler, but the middle section is one long run-on enumeration of all ten checks, which makes it dense to parse. The when-not-to-use, executable note, scoring rule and return shape are all tightly stated.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by listing the exact JSON return shape and the grade/score derivation. Combined with the per-check status vocabulary and the input-selection rule, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it.

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 earns above that by stating the mutual-exclusivity rule ('Provide exactly one') that the schema does not express, since both properties are optional with no oneOf constraint. It does not add format detail beyond the schema's own 16 MiB note.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Validate one Lottie animation file against the Designesy motion contract') and immediately names the scope of what is checked (m01–m10). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling designesy_score, which handles whole-site motion CSS.

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?

Gives an explicit positive case ('Use this to check that a motion asset is well formed and carries reduced-motion support') and an explicit negative with the alternative named ('When NOT to use: for the motion CSS of a whole site, use designesy_score'). It also tells the agent the invocation constraint: 'Pass url ... or lottie_file ... Provide exactly one.'

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

All Designesy toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources