Skip to main content
Glama

apply_look

Idempotent

Give a photo a named look (cinematic, noir, black and white...) in one call. You pick the look and how strong; the server applies it as live, editable filters, so the same look at the same strength always gives the same result. Applying a look again replaces the earlier one (it never stacks), so "less of it" is the same call at a lower strength; strength 0 removes it. Looks: cinematic (Teal shadows, warm highlights, softened blacks and a darkened frame, like a film still.) noir (Dark, contrasty black and white with a heavy vignette and a little grain.) bleach_bypass (Drained color and hard contrast with a cool cast, gritty like a war film.) bw_classic (Balanced black and white with gentle contrast.) bw_high_key (Bright, airy black and white with lifted blacks and low contrast.) bw_red_filter (Black and white that darkens blue skies and brightens warm tones, as a red lens filter does.) warm_social (Warmer light, livelier color and open shadows; a friendly look for social posts.) vintage_fade (Faded blacks and whites, muted color, warm highlights, grain and a soft vignette, like an old print.) deep_fry (The over-processed meme look: saturation blown out, crushed contrast, a hot red-orange cast, heavy noise and hard sharpening. Add jpeg_crush for the blocky artifacts of a much-reposted JPEG.) On an image with more than one layer, say which layer with "layer". Offer these to people who describe an outcome instead of naming adjustments. It makes no file (unless jpeg_crush): call export_photo afterwards for a download link.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
lookYesWhich look.
imageYesImage id, as returned by open_photo.
layerNoLayer name; required when the image has more than one layer.
strengthNoHow much, 0 to 100.
jpeg_crushNoAlso export the result as a JPEG at quality 10 (heavy blocky artifacts, the authentic deep-fried finish) and return the download link. Works with any look.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover safety (non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: looks are live/editable filters, re-application replaces rather than stacks, strength 0 removes the effect, determinism of same-look-same-strength, and that no file is produced except under jpeg_crush. This is unusually rich disclosure for a mutation tool.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, replacement semantics, then the look catalog, then the export caveat — a sensible order. It is long and the look glosses are dense, but nearly every clause is load-bearing given how sparse the schema's enum description is; only minor trimming is possible.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining what the call yields (editable filters, no file) and that jpeg_crush returns a download link, plus pointing to export_photo for retrieval. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% but the schema itself is thin (look is merely "Which look."), so the description carries real semantic load: it enumerates and explains all nine looks, defines strength as intensity with 0 meaning removal, and reiterates the layer requirement. That is meaning well beyond the structured fields.

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+resource ("Give a photo a named look") with a concrete outcome (named presets, adjustable strength) that clearly separates it from generic siblings like add_adjustment, add_effect, and manage_filters. An agent can identify the tool's job without opening the schema.

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 explicit routing guidance ("Offer these to people who describe an outcome instead of naming adjustments"), the layer precondition for multi-layer images, the repeat-call semantics ("replaces the earlier one, it never stacks; strength 0 removes it"), and the required follow-up with export_photo for a download. When-to-use and downstream dependency are both spelled out.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources