Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aseprite MCP

Aseprite MCP

by MalloyTheDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

export_frames

Destructive

Export each frame to its own image file. Provide an output pattern containing {frame} to name files, and optionally overwrite existing files.

Instructions

Export each frame to its own image file.

output_pattern must contain "{frame}" (and optionally "{tag}", "{layer}"),
e.g. "frames/walk_{frame}.png". Aseprite substitutes the values.

overwrite: Replace files the pattern would expand onto (default False = no-clobber).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "filename": "<filename>",
      "output_pattern": "<output_pattern>"
    },
    "name": "export_frames"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scaleNoDefault: 1.
filenameYes
overwriteNoDefault: false.
output_patternYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / filename / title
      Removed value: -"Filename"
    • removedInput schema / properties / output_pattern / title
      Removed value: -"Output Pattern"
    • addedInput schema / properties / overwrite
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Default: false.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / scale / description
      Added value: +"Default: 1."
    • removedInput schema / properties / scale / title
      Removed value: -"Scale"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"export_framesArguments"
  2. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, giving the safety profile. The description adds the important no-clobber default behavior and the overwrite semantics, which is useful beyond annotations. However, it doesn't state where files are written, whether parent directories are created, or the interaction between destructiveness and the no-clobber default.

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?

Three tight, front-loaded sentences. The key constraint (output_pattern must contain {frame}) follows immediately after the purpose statement, and the overwrite clarification is appended without waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Adequate for a 4-param mutation tool with annotations and no output schema. It covers the pattern DSL and overwrite behavior, but omits output location context, directory creation, and how scale interacts with each export.

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 50%; the description explains output_pattern placeholder syntax ({frame}, {tag}, {layer}) and overwrite semantics, compensating for the schema's bareness on those two. The other two parameters (scale, filename) get no description elaboration beyond what the schema shows.

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 (export) and resource (each frame to its own image file) with explicit granularity. This clearly distinguishes it from export_png (single image), export_spritesheet (packed sheet), and export_gif (animation).

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?

Implied usage is clear from the purpose (per-frame image export), but there's no explicit guidance on when to choose this over export_layer or export_layers, nor any stated prerequisites. No when-not-to-use or alternative routing is provided.

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