glassypic
Server Details
AI image processing: upscale, resize, crop, compress, convert file format, and generate SEO metadata
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.4/5 across 3 of 3 tools scored.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: optimize_image handles image compression, status checks account details, and upgrade manages plan changes. No functional overlap exists.
Names follow a verb_noun pattern for optimize_image, but status is a noun and upgrade is a lone verb. Despite this minor inconsistency, they are clear and predictable.
Three tools is slightly low but appropriate for a focused image optimization utility. The core operation, status check, and upgrade path are covered without unnecessary bloat.
The set covers core optimization, status, and upgrades, but lacks a batch processing tool despite being mentioned in descriptions. Missing operations like viewing processing history or retrieving results for prior optimizations are gaps.
Available Tools
3 toolsoptimize_imageOptimize ImageAInspect
Optimize an image: smart lossy compression (typically 60-80% size reduction), optional resize/upscale/format conversion, and AI-generated SEO metadata. Accepts absolute local file paths or remote URLs. In remote/API mode, only remote URLs are supported. Supported input formats: JPG, PNG, WebP, AVIF, GIF, SVG, ICO, HEIC, TIFF, BMP (max 50 MB). Supported output formats: JPG, PNG, WebP, AVIF, GIF, SVG, ICO. Each call costs 3 credits + 1 if SEO tags enabled. Animated GIFs are processed frame-by-frame (each frame optimized individually). Cost = frames × per-frame operations. Use confirm_gif_cost: true after reviewing the cost warning. Free tier: 20 credits/day, no signup. Log in with the login tool for more credits. Use status tool to check remaining credits before batch processing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input | Yes | Absolute local file path or remote URL of the image to optimize. Note: in remote/API mode, only remote URLs are supported (no local file paths). Supported inputs: JPG, PNG, WebP, AVIF, GIF (animated supported), HEIC, TIFF, BMP (max 50 MB). GlassyPic supports high-quality conversion between any input and output format. | |
| output_path | No | Where to save. Accepts a file path (/tmp/out.webp) or directory ending in / (/tmp/images/). If omitted: saves next to original, named with SEO slug when SEO is enabled or .tinified suffix otherwise. URLs save to current working directory. | |
| output_format | No | Output format. Defaults to 'original' (keep input format). Animated GIFs stay animated when output is 'gif'; converting to other formats preserves only the first frame. SVG output from raster input uses vector tracing. ICO output generates a favicon set (16, 24, 32, 48, 256px) unless a specific size is given. | |
| gif_frame_limit | No | Maximum frames to process for animated GIFs (1-100, default 100). Reduces cost by sampling fewer frames while preserving animation. | |
| output_width_px | No | Target width in pixels. Set only width for proportional resize. Set both width and height for exact output dimensions (see output_resize_behavior). | |
| confirm_gif_cost | No | Set to true to proceed with animated GIF processing after seeing cost warning. Required for animated GIFs to prevent unexpected credit consumption. | |
| output_height_px | No | Target height in pixels. Set only height for proportional resize. Set both width and height for exact output dimensions (see output_resize_behavior). | |
| _gif_temp_file_id | No | Internal: temp file ID from a previous GIF cost warning. Skips re-upload. | |
| output_seo_tag_gen | No | Generate SEO metadata (alt text, keywords, filename) and rename output file to SEO slug. Costs 1 extra credit. Default: true. | |
| output_upscale_factor | No | AI upscale factor: 2 (2×) or 4 (4×). Uses Real-ESRGAN for high-quality upscaling. | |
| output_file_size_limit | No | Target maximum output file size in bytes. The server will attempt to meet this limit through additional compression. Not guaranteed. | |
| output_resize_behavior | No | When both width and height are set and aspect ratio differs: 'pad' adds white padding (default), 'crop' smart-crops to fill exact dimensions |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| output_path | Yes | Absolute path where the optimized file was saved |
| seo_alt_text | Yes | AI-generated image alt text for accessibility and SEO |
| seo_filename | Yes | AI-generated SEO filename slug without extension |
| seo_keywords | Yes | AI-generated keywords describing the image |
| output_format | Yes | Output format: jpg, png, webp, avif, or gif |
| output_width_px | Yes | Width of the output image in pixels |
| output_height_px | Yes | Height of the output image in pixels |
| compression_ratio | Yes | Output-to-input size ratio, e.g. 0.35 means 65% smaller |
| output_size_bytes | Yes | File size of the optimized image in bytes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It fully discloses credit costs per call and for SEO, GIF frame-by-frame processing and cost structure, required confirmation, resizing/upscaling behavior, file size limit behavior, and format conversion details. No contradictions.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single paragraph but is well-structured and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy. It efficiently covers multiple aspects (compression, formats, costs, GIF processing) in a compact form.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Despite detailed information, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success message, file path of saved image). With 12 parameters, an output schema exists (as per context) but the description omits return value details, leaving a gap for agents expecting response information.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining credit costs per operation and GIF confirmation requirement, which are not in the schema. It also sets context for parameter usage, though most parameter details are in the schema itself.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's main function ('Optimize an image') and lists key capabilities: smart lossy compression, optional resize/upscale/format conversion, and AI-generated SEO metadata. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (status, upgrade) which serve different purposes.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides extensive usage context, including supported formats, credit costs, GIF processing steps, and mode restrictions (local vs remote). It does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
statusAccount StatusAInspect
Check your GlassyPic account status: login state, tier, credits remaining, and credit reset time. Use this before batch processing to verify sufficient credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Clearly states it checks account status and lists specific information returned. Does not mention potential side effects (none expected) or rate limits, but is adequate for a simple read-only tool.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two efficient sentences: first defines purpose and output, second gives usage advice. Every word adds value with no unnecessary information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete enough for a simple check tool. It explains what it does and why to use it. Could potentially mention return format or error cases, but not critical.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('check') and resource ('account status'). It lists return fields (login state, tier, credits remaining, credit reset time) and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools (optimize_image, upgrade) by being a read-only status check.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly advises to use before batch processing to verify credits. Provides clear context for use, though it does not mention when not to use or alternative tools for other scenarios.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
upgradeUpgrade PlanAInspect
Open the GlassyPic pricing page in your browser to upgrade your plan for more credits. Plans: Free (50/day), Pro (3,000/month), Max (10,000/month).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that it opens a browser page rather than directly modifying the plan, and lists available plans. With no annotations, it provides behavioral context, though could mention it's non-destructive.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded purpose, no waste. Efficiently conveys key information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Covers purpose and behavior adequately for a parameterless tool, but could more explicitly state that it only opens a page and doesn't directly change the plan.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description adds value beyond schema by listing plan options and credits, enhancing semantics.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the tool opens the GlassyPic pricing page to upgrade plan, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like optimize_image and status, which deal with image processing and status checks.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Description implies use for upgrading plan but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, or any exclusions. No mention of when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!