Aseprite MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

export_game_asset_bundle

Destructive

Export a sprite into a game-ready bundle with flattened PNG, animated GIF, packed sprite sheet plus JSON, per-tag GIFs, and a manifest.

Instructions

Export a sprite into a game-ready bundle directory: a flattened PNG, an animated GIF, a packed sprite sheet (+ JSON data), a GIF per animation tag, and a manifest.json describing everything.

Args:
    overwrite: Replace existing bundle files (default False = no-clobber). Every
        planned output is checked up front, so the bundle fails before writing any
        file if a target already exists.

Returns a ``workflow_manifest.v1`` manifest (the same object is also written to
disk as manifest.json inside the bundle).

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>"
    },
    "name": "export_game_asset_bundle"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`scale`	No	Default: 1.
`filename`	Yes
`overwrite`	No	Default: false.
`bundle_name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.10.0Oct 4, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / bundle_name / anyOf
```
Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / bundle_name / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
- removedInput schema / properties / bundle_name / title
```
Removed value: -"Bundle Name"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / bundle_name / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- removedInput schema / properties / filename / title
```
Removed value: -"Filename"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / overwrite / description
```
Added value: +"Default: false."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / overwrite / title
```
Removed value: -"Overwrite"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / scale / description
```
Added value: +"Default: 1."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / scale / title
```
Removed value: -"Scale"
```
- removedInput schema / title
```
Removed value: -"export_game_asset_bundleArguments"
```
First observedv0.7.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag this as non-read-only and destructive, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior: no-clobber default, an up-front check of every planned output, and fail-before-writing semantics. It could still say more about permissions or clobber risk per file, but it meaningfully exceeds the annotation baseline.

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 the artifact list, then a focused Args block on the one parameter that needs explanation, then a tight Returns sentence. Only minor redundancy in restating that the manifest is both returned and written as manifest.json.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description correctly fills that gap by naming the returned workflow_manifest.v1 and its on-disk counterpart. Mutation semantics and the overwrite flag are covered, though scale/bundle_name remain unaddressed for a 4-parameter tool.

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 description coverage is only 50% (filename and bundle_name have no descriptions; scale/overwrite only carry boilerplate defaults). The description thoroughly explains overwrite's no-clobber behavior, but adds nothing for scale, bundle_name, or filename, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 (sprite into a game-ready bundle directory), then enumerates the exact artifacts produced: flattened PNG, animated GIF, packed sprite sheet + JSON, per-tag GIFs, and manifest.json. This clearly distinguishes it from the single-purpose siblings export_png, export_gif, and export_spritesheet_packed.

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?

Usage is implied by the artifact list (use this instead of calling the individual export tools when you want everything at once), but the description never explicitly says when to choose this over export_png/export_gif/export_spritesheet or what prerequisites exist. The reader must infer the routing.

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

Deploy Server