Convert a sprite layer or frame toward grayscale by a set percentage (0-100) to mute colors while retaining partial saturation. Use it to reduce color intensity without fully removing color.
Desaturate toward grayscale by amount percent (0-100).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| frame | No | Default: 1. | |
| layer | No | ||
| amount | No | Default: 100. | |
| filename | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.10.0Input schema / properties / amount / descriptionAdded value: +"Default: 100."Input schema / properties / amount / titleRemoved value: -"Amount"Input schema / properties / filename / titleRemoved value: -"Filename"Input schema / properties / frame / descriptionAdded value: +"Default: 1."Input schema / properties / frame / titleRemoved value: -"Frame"Input schema / properties / layer / anyOfRemoved value: -[
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
-]Input schema / properties / layer / defaultRemoved value: -nullInput schema / properties / layer / titleRemoved value: -"Layer"Input schema / properties / layer / typeAdded value: +"string"Input schema / titleRemoved value: -"desaturateArguments"v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, confirming this is a mutation. The description adds the amount range (0-100) and direction (toward grayscale), which is useful context, but does not disclose what exactly gets modified (layer, frame) or whether changes are reversible.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Every word contributes to stating the operation and its degree.
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?
For a mutating tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits which sprite/layer/frame is affected and leaves required 'filename' and optional 'layer' unexplained, so an agent cannot fully predict the tool's effect.
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 50%. The description adds meaning for 'amount' (percent toward grayscale, 0-100), which goes beyond the schema's bare 'Default: 100.' However, it does not explain the required 'filename' or the optional 'layer' and 'frame' parameters, so partial compensation only.
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?
States a specific verb ('Desaturate') and the effect ('toward grayscale by amount percent'), so the agent knows the operation. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like adjust_hue_saturation or invert_colors, but the core purpose is clear.
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?
No when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or mention of alternatives. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer when to select it over sibling color operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.