Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ChatGPT Context Bridge

ChatGPT Context Bridge

by howdycarter
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Register Image Asset

register_image_asset
Idempotent

Register image assets by recording the generation prompt, source chat, and usage rights before staging them for review.

Instructions

Stage image-generation artifacts by recording prompt, source chat, usage-rights note, and optional local copied asset. Does not publish media.

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": {
      "source": "<source>",
      "source_kind": "<source_kind>"
    },
    "name": "register_image_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
promptNoPrompt or generation context for the image.
sourceYesLocal image path or http(s) URL.
source_kindYesWhether source is a local file or URL.
source_chat_idNoOptional staged chat ID associated with the image.
response_formatNoOutput format: markdown or json.markdown
usage_rights_noteNoUsage rights or publication review note.
suggested_homebase_folderNoSuggested Homebase media folder.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly=false, destructive=false, and idempotent=true. The description adds a useful constraint ('Does not publish media') but does not explain the actual side effects of staging (e.g., where records are stored, whether files are copied) or any prerequisites. It adds some context but not rich behavioral transparency.

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, front-loaded with the action ('Stage image-generation artifacts'), and every clause earns its place. The second sentence provides a clear boundary without wasted words.

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?

With 7 parameters, 2 enums, and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the purpose and a key constraint but omits operational context such as how response_format affects output, what 'staging' entails (e.g., database write, file copy), and when to use it in a workflow. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. However, the description introduces the ambiguous phrase 'optional local copied asset' that does not map cleanly to any schema parameter (likely referring to 'source' or 'suggested_homebase_folder'), and it only lists a subset of fields. This could confuse an agent selecting parameters, and the description adds little value 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's purpose: to stage image-generation artifacts by recording prompt, source chat, usage-rights note, and optional local copied asset. It explicitly differentiates from publishing by stating 'Does not publish media,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like generate_image_asset and propose_notion_page.

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 implies use for recording/staging image artifacts before publication, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as generate_image_asset or propose_notion_page. It gives clear context ('stage', 'does not publish') but no explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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