Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gimp-mcp

gimp-mcp

by abelduarte
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

gimp.get_image

Retrieve details of an open image in GIMP using its image ID. Access image properties for inspection or further processing.

Instructions

Inspect one open image by GIMP image ID.

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": {
      "image_id": "<image_id>"
    },
    "name": "gimp.get_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
image_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It says 'inspect' implying read-only, but does not confirm no side effects, permissions needed, or whether the image remains open. Minimal disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, but it is too brief for the complexity of the tool. It lacks necessary details about output or usage, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and a vague description, the agent lacks essential context. The tool's return value, behavior, and constraints are entirely unspecified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one parameter (image_id) with no description. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name, and schema description coverage is 0%.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool inspects an open image by ID, but 'inspect' is vague and doesn't specify what information is returned (e.g., dimensions, properties). It does not differentiate from siblings like get_info or get_image_bitmap.

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 vs alternatives. There are many sibling tools (e.g., get_image_bitmap, list_images) but no context for selection.

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