Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aseprite MCP Tools

Aseprite MCP Tools

by NosytLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

resize_canvas

Scale the canvas and all its content to specified pixel dimensions.

Instructions

Scale the canvas and all its content to new dimensions.

Args: filename: Aseprite file to modify width: New canvas width in pixels height: New canvas height in pixels

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>",
      "width": "<width>",
      "height": "<height>"
    },
    "name": "resize_canvas"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
widthYes
heightYes
filenameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and description lacks details on scaling behavior (e.g., interpolation, aspect ratio, handling of pixels outside new bounds), which is critical for understanding side effects.

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?

Extremely concise: one line for purpose, then a bulleted parameter list. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 basic invocation, but missing return value info and edge-case behavior (e.g., scaling when new dimensions are smaller/larger, scaling algorithm). No output schema to compensate.

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?

Description adds units ('in pixels') and clarifies each parameter beyond the schema, which had no descriptions. With 0% schema coverage, this compensates well but doesn't explain constraints like min/max.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Scale' and resource 'canvas and all its content to new dimensions', distinguishing it from sibling 'crop_canvas' which crops without scaling.

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 for resizing canvas with content scaling, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, and no alternatives like 'crop_canvas' mentioned.

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