pixoo-mcp-server

by cyanheads

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Local

Server Quality Checklist

Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

Latest release: v1.0.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a unique function: scene composition, device control, design guidance, network discovery, text display, persistent overlay, and image push. There is no meaningful overlap; even the two text-related tools (display_text and overlay_text) are clearly differentiated by previewability and persistence.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tools follow a consistent 'pixoo_verb_noun' pattern in snake_case, making the purpose obvious from the name. No mixing of conventions or vague verbs.
Tool Count5/5
Seven tools cover the essential operations for a Pixoo device: discovery, control, text, image, scene, overlay, and design guidance. This is neither too sparse nor too heavy for the domain.
Completeness4/5
The set covers setup, state management, text, image, scenes (including animation), and persistent overlays. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to retrieve the currently displayed image, but the core workflows are well-supported.
Average 4.5/5 across 7 of 7 tools scored.
See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.
- No community issues in the last 6 months
- 12 commits in the last 12 weeks
- Last stable release on June 12, 2026
- No critical vulnerability alerts
- No high-severity vulnerability alerts
- No code scanning findings
- CI status not available
This repository is licensed under Apache 2.0.
This repository includes a README.md file.
No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.
Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.
Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.
If you are the author, simply .
If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:
```
{
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}
```
Then . Browse examples.
Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description reveals non-destructive behavior (push is optional), idempotency (same image push yields same result), and open-world nature (loads from local or URL). It also details the return value showing the exact downsampled result, adding beyond annotations.
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?
Three sentences succinctly cover purpose, return behavior, and kernel guidance. Front-loaded with essential information, no redundant content.
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?
Description explains return value and kernel options, but does not mention prerequisites like device discovery or error conditions. Given tool simplicity and existence of sibling tools for discovery, this is a minor gap.
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 already provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond reiterating source format and kernel choices; baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 tool loads, resizes, and optionally pushes an image to the LED grid, returning a preview. It distinguishes itself from siblings like pixoo_compose_scene by focusing on direct image push.
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?
The description provides kernel recommendations for pixel art vs photos but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like pixoo_compose_scene or pixoo_display_text. Usage context is implied but not directly addressed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that it provides 'live device context' and 'pre-filled next-tool suggestions,' which is useful but not deeply behavioral. No contradiction.
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 sentences: first states purpose and scope, second gives usage context. No wasted words, front-loaded.
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?
Despite having an output schema (so return values are covered), the description fully captures purpose, usage, and content coverage for a simple guidance tool. No gaps.
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 100% and already describes each enum value for 'topic.' The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema.
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 tool returns 'craft guidance and live device context' for a design topic, listing specific areas covered (legibility, palette, layout, animation, suggestions). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by positioning as an orientation tool before authoring or troubleshooting.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines4/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explicitly says to run 'before authoring a scene, dashboard, or animation — or when troubleshooting display issues,' providing clear context for when to use. It lacks explicit exclusions but sufficiently guides the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate read-only, idempotent behavior. Description adds rendering order ('back-to-front in array order') and return value ('image content block'), complementing annotations without contradiction.
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?
Three sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence earns its place by explaining functionality, return value, and alternatives.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (multiple element types, effects, animation), the description covers key aspects: layering, animations, return value, and sibling differentiation. The presence of a complete output schema reduces the burden on the description.
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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the description adds no additional parameter details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 verb 'compose' and resource 'full scene' with specific element types. It distinguishes from the sibling pixoo_display_text for text-only display, ensuring the agent selects the correct tool.
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?
Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance: 'For text-only display use pixoo_display_text' and recommends pixoo_design_brief for layout/palette help. This helps the agent choose between tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate non-destructive (destructiveHint: false) and idempotent (idempotentHint: true). The description adds context: the tool reads state when called without params and returns state after changes when params are supplied. No contradictions, but no details on rate limits or authentication beyond the prerequisite.
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 sentences: first lists capabilities, second explains usage modes. Every word is necessary, front-loaded with action, no fluff.
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?
Given the output schema exists (not shown but indicated in context signals), the description sufficiently covers prerequisites, usage modes, and parameter scope. It does not need to explain return values as the output schema handles that.
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 100% with each parameter already described (e.g., brightness range 0–100, channel enum values). The description restates the parameters without adding new semantics beyond grouping them and noting the read-vs-change behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 tool reads or changes device state, listing specific attributes (brightness, screen, channel, clock face). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pixoo_discover_devices and pixoo_display_text, which handle discovery and content display respectively.
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?
The description explicitly explains when to call with no params (read only) versus with params (apply changes then read). It also provides a prerequisite: use pixoo_discover_devices first if PIXOO_IP is not configured, offering clear guidance on tool sequencing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds specific context about internet requirement and the endpoint queried, which enhances transparency without contradicting annotations.
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 succinct sentences that front-load key information. No unnecessary words, every sentence adds value.
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 discovery tool with output schema and annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage context, prerequisites, and links to sibling tools.
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 100% and adequately documents the single parameter (timeoutMs). The tool description does not add additional semantic information beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.
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 identifies the verb 'find', resource 'Pixoo devices', and method 'cloud discovery endpoint'. It distinguishes from siblings by noting it is for initial setup and referencing pixoo_control_device for ongoing use.
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?
Explicitly states when to use it ('Run once during initial setup'), prerequisites ('requires internet'), and when to use alternatives ('For ongoing device control use pixoo_control_device').
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate non-destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds that it pushes to the device, returns an image for inspection, and details that brightness failure is a warning. It also explains the 'auto' effect behavior. No contradictions.
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 two sentences long plus a note about alternatives and prerequisite. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and succinctly covers key points without waste.
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?
Despite complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, enums), the description provides a solid overview: purpose, usage guidelines, return format (image block), and key features. The output schema exists, so return details are covered elsewhere. The description is sufficient for an agent to understand the 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema; it mentions theme, gradient, shadow, outline, and auto-fit, but these are already in the schema. The description provides context but limited added value for parameter semantics.
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 'Render styled text onto the Pixoo display and push it' and distinguishes from sibling tools like pixoo_compose_scene and pixoo_design_brief. It specifies the tool as the primary one for text-only display.
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?
Explicitly says when to use (text-only display) and when not to (use pixoo_compose_scene for layers, icons, etc.). Also recommends running pixoo_design_brief first for guidance. Provides clear context and alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Behavior5/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Overlays use device-rendered fonts...', 'persist across channel switches until explicitly cleared', and 'Not previewable — rendering happens on-device.' Annotations (destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) are consistent and supplemented.
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 five sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant or extraneous information. Every sentence adds value.
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?
With a well-covered schema (11 params, 100% description in schema), annotations, and an output schema (context indicates exists), the description completes the picture by explaining persistence, on-device rendering, and the alternative tool. No gaps remain.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining font ID ranges and examples (e.g., 18=arrows, 20=°C/°F) and clarifying overlay slot behavior. However, it does not elaborate on all parameters beyond schema.
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 explicitly states the verb-resource pair: 'Set or clear a device-native scrolling text overlay.' It also distinguishes from the sibling tool pixoo_display_text, which is for styled, previewable text.
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?
The description clearly states when to use ('Best for persistent tickers over pushed scenes') and when not ('for styled, previewable text use pixoo_display_text instead'), providing an explicit alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

Copy to your README.md:

[![pixoo-mcp-server MCP server](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/cyanheads/pixoo-mcp-server/badges/card.svg)](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/cyanheads/pixoo-mcp-server)

Score Badge

Copy to your README.md:

[![pixoo-mcp-server MCP server](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/cyanheads/pixoo-mcp-server/badges/score.svg)](https://glama.ai/mcp/servers/cyanheads/pixoo-mcp-server)

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/cyanheads/pixoo-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server