Skip to main content
Glama
MalloyTheDev

Aseprite MCP

by MalloyTheDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

export_png

Destructive

Export one Aseprite frame as a flattened PNG, with optional frame selection, integer upscaling, and overwrite control.

Instructions

Export one frame as a flattened PNG.

Args:
    output: Destination .png path.
    frame: Frame to export, 1-based (default 1).
    scale: Integer upscaling factor (default 1).
    overwrite: Replace `output` if it already exists (default False = no-clobber).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
frameNoDefault: 1.
scaleNoDefault: 1.
outputYes
filenameYes
overwriteNoDefault: false.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed9 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / filename / title
      Removed value: -"Filename"
    • addedInput schema / properties / frame / description
      Added value: +"Default: 1."
    • removedInput schema / properties / frame / title
      Removed value: -"Frame"
    • removedInput schema / properties / output / title
      Removed value: -"Output"
    • 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_pngArguments"
  2. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds concrete behavioral context that annotations don't: overwrite defaults to no-clobber ('Replace output if it already exists') and output is flattened. This clarifies exactly what the destructive flag governs. It doesn't cover error behavior or rate limits, but the no-clobber disclosure is genuinely useful.

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 purpose sentence followed by a tight args list, with zero filler. Each line earns its place. The structure is standard and readable, though the args block could be folded more compactly.

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?

For an export tool with no output schema, the destination-path and overwrite semantics are covered, but the required 'filename' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description, leaving a real gap for correct invocation. Return/error behavior is also unaddressed.

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?

Schema coverage is 60% (frame/scale/overwrite only carry 'Default: X'), and the description meaningfully extends this: frame is 1-based, scale is an integer upscaling factor, and overwrite's no-clobber default is spelled out. The required 'filename' parameter is never explained in either the schema or the description, which caps the score below 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Export one frame as a flattened PNG.' The phrase 'one frame' implicitly distinguishes it from siblings like export_frames and export_spritesheet, so an agent can route reasonably. It stops short of explicitly naming those alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to the many export siblings (export_gif, export_frames, export_layer, export_spritesheet). The 'one frame' scoping implies a single-frame use case but leaves the agent to infer it against alternatives.

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