Skip to main content
Glama

Create text overlay

create_text_overlay

Create styled text overlays with font size, color, and alignment. Composite over a visual source or output on transparent background for titles, lyrics, or credits.

Instructions

Composite styled text over a visual (or on its own transparent background) — a Text TOP with font size, color, and alignment, optionally laid 'over' a source TOP through a Composite TOP, output as a Null. For lyrics, titles, song names, or credits in a set. Distinct from the vault's bind_vault_text (which data-syncs a Text DAT to a note); this is a finished visual layer ready for setup_output.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textNoThe text to display.TEXT
source_pathNoOptional TOP to composite the text over (e.g. a finished visual). Omit to get the text alone on a transparent background, ready to composite later.
font_sizeNoFont size in pixels.
colorNoText color as a hex string, e.g. '#ff3366'.#ffffff
alignNoHorizontal alignment.center
valignNoVertical alignment.center
resolutionNo1080p
parent_pathNo/project1
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses the compositing pipeline and output format (Null) beyond what annotations provide. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description aligns with these without contradiction.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Each 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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core workflow but omits details on resolution and parent_path. It provides enough context for typical use but leaves gaps.

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 high (75%), so the baseline is 3. The description mentions font size, color, and alignment but adds little beyond schema. It does contextualize source_path but does not explain resolution or parent_path.

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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a styled text overlay, explaining the internal TOPs involved (Text TOP, Composite TOP, Null). It explicitly distinguishes from bind_vault_text, making the purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides a use case list (lyrics, titles, etc.) and contrasts with a sibling tool. However, it does not specify when NOT to use it or discuss other alternatives among siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Pantani/tdmcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server