Skip to main content
Glama
chrischall

skylight-mcp

by chrischall
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

skylight_set_member_avatar

Destructive

Set a family member's avatar to a custom photo from a local image file. Requires user confirmation before uploading.

Instructions

Set a family member's avatar to a custom photo from a local image file (uploaded as multipart/form-data). For a preset emoji avatar, use skylight_list_avatars + the avatar_id on create/update instead. Asks the user to confirm first: a confirmation prompt where the client supports one; otherwise the first call returns a preview and a confirmToken, and only a repeat call with that token proceeds (see MCP_CONFIRM_MODE). The preview echoes the resolved absolute image_path, detected mime and size, and nothing is uploaded until it is confirmed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesCategory/member id.
frameIdNo
image_pathYesAbsolute path to a local image file (jpg, jpeg, png, heic, gif, webp; max 20 MiB). Anything else — or a symlink, or a file whose contents do not match its extension — is refused.
confirmTokenNoONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 "confirmation-required" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.3.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Must be true to proceed. Without this, the tool returns a preview.",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / confirmToken
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "ONLY for the two-step confirmation fallback (a client without MCP elicitation). The confirmToken from this same tool's phase-1 \"confirmation-required\" response, passed back ONLY after the user has seen that preview and explicitly approved it in chat — never on the first call, never invented, never reused. Call again with the same arguments. Ignored when the client supports elicitation.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.3
    • changedInput schema / properties / image_path / description
      Previous value: -"Absolute path to a local image file (jpg, png, heic, …)."New value: +"Absolute path to a local image file (jpg, jpeg, png, heic, gif, webp; max 20 MiB). Anything else — or a symlink, or a file whose contents do not match its extension — is refused."
  3. Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  4. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.1
    • removedInput schema / properties / id / anyOf
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  }
-]
    • addedInput schema / properties / id / type
      Added value: +[
+  "string",
+  "number"
+]
  5. First observedv0.4.6

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The annotations already signal mutation (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: true), but the description goes well beyond them by disclosing the two-phase confirmation behavior, the preview/confirmToken fallback, the refusal of symlinks and mismatched file contents, and the fact that nothing is uploaded until confirmed. This is rich behavioral context an agent needs to drive the tool safely.

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 tightly packed and front-loaded: purpose in the first sentence, the alternative in the second, and the confirmation mechanics after. Every sentence carries useful information, and the longer confirmToken explanation is warranted given the safety-critical two-step flow.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a mutating file-upload tool with no output schema, the description covers the confirmation flow, constraints, and fallback behavior thoroughly. The only notable gap is frameId, which is neither explained in the schema nor the description; otherwise an agent has enough context to invoke this tool correctly.

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 75%: id, image_path, and confirmToken already have detailed schema descriptions, so the description adds only marginal param semantics there. However, frameId is completely unexplained in both the schema and the description, and the description doesn't compensate for that gap or clarify when it is needed.

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 opens with a specific verb–resource pair: 'Set a family member's avatar to a custom photo from a local image file.' It also differentiates from the sibling path for preset emoji avatars (skylight_list_avatars + avatar_id), so an agent knows exactly what this tool does and what it does not do.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when NOT to use this tool: 'For a preset emoji avatar, use skylight_list_avatars + the avatar_id on create/update instead.' It also gives detailed instructions about the confirmation flow, including when to pass confirmToken and when it is ignored, leaving little room for incorrect invocation.

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