SealsCrafter 印章

render_chinese_name_seal

Render a traditional Chinese name seal (印章) as a PNG image for a Western/English name. The name is transliterated into seal script (篆書) characters chosen for meaning, and the result includes each character meaning. Returns a base64 PNG plus an explanation. Free, no API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ink`	No	Carving mode: positive 朱文 (red characters on paper), negative 白文 (characters cut out of a solid red field). Default positive.
`name`	Yes	English/Western name, e.g. "Emma" or "Alexander"
`size`	No	PNG edge length in px (64-1024, default 512)
`shape`	No	Seal shape: square 方章, circle 圆印, oval 椭圆名章 (default square)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedSep 28, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / ink

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Carving mode: positive 朱文 (red characters on paper), negative 白文 (characters cut out of a solid red field). Default positive.",
+  "enum": [
+    "positive",
+    "negative"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / shape

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Seal shape: square 方章, circle 圆印, oval 椭圆名章 (default square)",
+  "enum": [
+    "square",
+    "circle",
+    "oval"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / size / description

Previous value: -"PNG edge length in px (128-1024, default 512)"New value: +"PNG edge length in px (64-1024, default 512)"

First observedSep 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the transliteration-to-seal-script behavior, that meaning is selected deliberately, the return payload (base64 PNG plus an explanation with each character's meaning), and the cost/auth profile (free, no API key). It omits any note on determinism or rate limits, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the core action and scope come first, then the return format and cost/auth facts. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description still covers the action, input domain, return shape, and cost/auth requirements, so an agent can call it correctly. It could add a sentence on whether the PNG is inline-only or how large the explanation is, but coverage is close to complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so ink, size, shape, and name are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail (e.g., valid ranges or enum implications) beyond what the schema provides, which is the expected baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (render) and a concrete resource (traditional Chinese name seal as PNG) scoped to Western/English names, which is far more specific than the sibling names suggest. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from lookup_meaning or suggest_names, so it stops 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 Guidelines3/5

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

"Free, no API key" implies ready-to-call usage, and the input domain (Western/English name) is stated, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing against the siblings lookup_meaning and suggest_names. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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

All SealsCrafter 印章 tools Inspect

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

Need Help?