Skip to main content
Glama
Bieuulls

Illustrator AI & MCP Control

by Bieuulls
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

illustrator_place_file

Destructive

Import external images or vector files into the active Illustrator document, with options to link, embed, or trace raster images into editable vectors.

Instructions

Place an external file (EPS, AI, PDF, image) into the document.

CONTRACT: readOnly=False, destructive=True, idempotent=False, openWorld=True

WHEN TO USE:

  • Importing raster images (PNG, JPG) into Illustrator

  • Placing vector files (EPS, AI, PDF, SVG)

  • Vectorizing raster images via Image Trace (trace=True)

KEY CONCEPTS: linked=True (drafting) — file updates automatically when source changes linked=False (final) — file is embedded and fully editable embed_editable=True — opens PDF, copies content as editable vectors (slower) trace=True — place raster, then run Image Trace to vectorize

EXAMPLES: Place a linked image: {"params": {"file_path": "C:/img/photo.png", "x": 100, "y": 50, "linked": true}} Place and auto-trace: {"params": {"file_path": "C:/img/photo.png", "trace": true, "trace_preset": "6 Colors"}}

NOTES:

  • trace + expand=True: editable paths, higher DOM complexity

  • trace + expand=False: live trace PluginItem, lighter but limited editability

  • High-complexity images may produce >2000 paths (warning emitted)

  • Reads external files from filesystem (openWorld)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it explains key behavioral consequences: linked vs. embedded files, editable vs. live-trace results, PDF vectorization behavior, and the warning about >2000 paths. It also discloses openWorld file-system reads and matches the annotations exactly with no contradiction.

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?

The description is longer than average but well-structured with CONTRACT, WHEN TO USE, KEY CONCEPTS, EXAMPLES, and NOTES sections that make it scannable. The CONTRACT block repeats annotation values and some note content is redundant, which keeps it from a perfect score.

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?

The description is complete for invocation: it gives when to use, key trade-offs, concrete examples, and operational warnings. The main omission is a clear statement of the return shape beyond the id being 'always returned,' especially since no output schema is present.

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?

Even though the context reports 0% schema coverage, this description adds real meaning to the behavior-driving parameters: linked, trace, expand, embed_editable, and trace_preset. It does not add semantic detail for x/y, id, jobId, or expected_document_token, but those have adequate definitions in the input schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Place an external file (EPS, AI, PDF, image) into the document.' It enumerates supported file types and clearly separates this tool from execution, export, and query siblings by focusing on document insertion. The scope is immediately understandable without needing to inspect 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 Guidelines4/5

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

The 'WHEN TO USE' section explicitly lists importing raster images, placing vector files, and vectorizing via Image Trace, giving clear context for selecting this tool. It does not state when-not-to-use or name alternatives like the SVG path importer, so it falls just short of a full 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools