Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
playcal

playcal

by RizgarOzan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

playcal_assets

Check texture import settings against a folder policy in Unity or Godot projects, covering type, mipmaps, Read/Write, compression, and max size to catch misconfigurations.

Instructions

check texture import settings (.meta / .import) against a folder policy: type, mipmaps, Read/Write, compression, max size, offline

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "playcal_assets"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathsNoimages to check (default: every image in the project)
actionYescheck: texture import settings against the policy
policyNoJSON {"rules": [{"match": "*/UI/*", "texture_type": ["Sprite"], "mipmaps": false, "readable": false, "compressed": true, "max_size": 2048}]}; default: UI as sprites without mipmaps, everything compressed, not readable, at most 4096
project_pathNoUnity or Godot project folder (default .).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. 'check' implies a read-only audit and it lists exactly what is inspected, but it never states that nothing is modified, whether it can auto-fix violations, or how results are surfaced. 'offline' is ambiguous and adds no behavioral clarity.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, opening with the verb and resource and then listing the checked facets. The parenthetical file extensions are useful; 'offline' is the one term that is compressed past the point of comprehension.

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 four fully documented parameters the inputs are well covered, but there is no output schema and the description never says what a check returns (violation list, pass/fail, severity) or whether it is purely diagnostic. For an audit tool that omission forces the agent to call it blind about results.

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 100%, including a worked JSON policy example and a stated default policy, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'folder policy' concept and the checked fields but adds no format or semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

Names a specific verb (check) and a precise resource (texture import settings in .meta/.import files) and enumerates the properties validated (type, mipmaps, Read/Write, compression, max size). It is clear enough to separate from playcal_meta or playcal_visual, though it never explicitly says so.

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?

The policy-compliance framing implies when the tool is appropriate (auditing asset import settings against project rules), but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative among the many playcal siblings. The trailing word 'offline' is unexplained and gives no actionable guidance.

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