opentoonz-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Opentoonz Scene Info

opentoonz_scene_info

Get a scene's frame and column counts, levels, and cell map. Scans rows up to a max limit and flags if the scene is taller.

Instructions

Report a scene's frame/column counts, its levels, and its cell map.

The cell map is scanned row by row and stops at max_rows (default 1000); the output says so explicitly when a scene is taller than that.

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": {
      "workspace": "<workspace>",
      "scene": "<scene>"
    },
    "name": "opentoonz_scene_info"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scene`	Yes
`max_rows`	No
`workspace`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.8.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, and it does add real value by explaining that the cell map is scanned row by row and truncated at max_rows, with the output flagging taller scenes. However, it omits any read-only framing, scene/workspace existence requirements, or error behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences that front-load what is reported and then qualify the one parameter with non-obvious behavior. Nothing is padded.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should stand in for return-value documentation; it lists the reported fields (counts, levels, cell map) but gives no shape or format detail. It also leaves two of three parameters unexplained, so it is only adequate for a read tool.

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 0%, so all three parameters rely on the description. max_rows is genuinely clarified (row-by-row scan, stops at the limit, output flags truncation), but workspace and scene carry no semantics at all beyond their names.

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?

States a specific verb (Report) and enumerates exactly what is returned: frame/column counts, levels, and the cell map. This distinguishes it from mutation siblings like opentoonz_set_cells or opentoonz_scene_new, but it never names a sibling explicitly for contrast.

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 reach for this instead of overlapping inspection tools (opentoonz_health, opentoonz_doctor, opentoonz_exposure). Usage is only implied by the word 'Report'; there are no conditions or exclusions stated.

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