Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Midjourney MCP Server

Midjourney MCP Server

by cotlet-connect
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

midjourney_status

Check that your Cotlet.dev account and Midjourney connection are ready by verifying account status, credits, and connection health before running prompts.

Instructions

Check that your Cotlet.dev account and Midjourney are ready: account, credits and Midjourney connection.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "midjourney_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
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; it does disclose the three things inspected (account, credits, Midjourney connection), which tells the agent this is a diagnostic rather than an action. However it never states that the call is read-only/non-mutating, whether it requires authentication or incurs cost, or what happens when a check fails.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first and the three checked items enumerated; nothing is wasted and no filler or repetition of the title appears.

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?

For a zero-parameter, zero-annotation tool with no output schema, the description should say what the result looks like (e.g., a pass/fail per check) and what a failure means for subsequent calls. It covers the scope of the check but leaves the return shape and failure semantics entirely undocumented.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter text is needed.

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?

The description names a specific verb ("Check") and a specific subject: Cotlet.dev account readiness and Midjourney readiness, enumerated as account, credits, and Midjourney connection. That is enough to separate it from the sibling tools (click, close, guide, open, read, type), which are all UI-interaction actions, though the description itself never states that contrast.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent can infer this is a pre-flight/readiness check to run before attempting Midjourney actions, but the text never says when to call it, when not to, or that the other midjourney_* tools are the alternative path. No prerequisites or ordering guidance are given.

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