Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Aseprite MCP Tools

Aseprite MCP Tools

by ZeroTian
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

delete_tag

Delete a specific animation tag by its name from an Aseprite file to remove unwanted tags.

Instructions

Delete an animation tag by name.

Args: filename: Aseprite file to modify name: Tag name to delete

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>",
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "delete_tag"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
filenameYes
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description indicates a destructive action ('Delete') but provides no additional behavioral details such as reversibility, permissions, or side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it is minimal.

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?

The description is exceptionally concise, front-loading the core action and listing parameters in a clean format. Every word serves a purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple delete operation with two required parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the tool's purpose and parameters. No additional context is necessary.

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?

The description explains both parameters: filename is the Aseprite file, name is the tag name. However, schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate with more detail (e.g., file path format). It is adequate but not thorough.

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 action ('delete') and the resource ('animation tag'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'set_tag' which creates or updates tags.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_tag). A simple delete operation may not need extensive guidance, but the description lacks any context or prerequisites.

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