Code Screenshot Generator
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| generate_code_screenshotC | Generate a beautiful screenshot of code with syntax highlighting and themes |
| screenshot_from_fileB | Screenshot code directly from a file path, with optional line range selection. Auto-detects language from file extension. |
| screenshot_git_diffB | Generate a screenshot of git diff output. Shows changes in your working directory or staged changes. |
| batch_screenshotB | Generate screenshots for multiple files at once. Useful for documenting multiple code files quickly. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 4 tools
The tools are mostly distinct with clear purposes: batch_screenshot for multiple files, generate_code_screenshot for general code, screenshot_from_file for file-based input, and screenshot_git_diff for git diffs. There is minor overlap between generate_code_screenshot and screenshot_from_file, as both handle single-file code screenshots, but the descriptions clarify the input method differences.
The naming is mixed with no consistent pattern: batch_screenshot uses verb_noun, generate_code_screenshot uses verb_adjective_noun, screenshot_from_file uses noun_preposition_noun, and screenshot_git_diff uses noun_noun. This inconsistency makes the set less predictable, though all names are readable and descriptive.
With 4 tools, the count is well-scoped for a code screenshot generator. Each tool serves a distinct use case (batch processing, general code, file input, git diffs), and there are no redundant or missing tools for the domain, making it efficient and focused.
The tool set covers the core workflows for code screenshots: single and batch generation, file-based input, and git diffs. A minor gap exists in lacking a tool for screenshot customization (e.g., themes or layout adjustments), but agents can work around this with the provided tools for most documentation needs.