Aseprite-MCP

by iborymagic

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

aseprite_export_metadata

Export metadata from an Aseprite file to a JSON data file. Specify the input file path and the output data file path.

Instructions

Export metadata json from Aseprite file

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": {
      "inputFile": "<inputFile>",
      "dataFile": "<dataFile>"
    },
    "name": "aseprite_export_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`format`	No
`dataFile`	Yes
`inputFile`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.5.0Jul 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the generic purpose, omitting details about whether the operation is destructive, requires the file to be open, or any side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it is underspecified. It could be restructured to front-load key information while adding needed detail.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema, no annotations, and 0% param descriptions, the description is far from complete. It lacks information on return values, behavior, and parameter details.

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 0% (no descriptions in schema). The description hints that inputFile is the source and dataFile is the output, but does not explain the optional 'format' parameter. This is insufficient for a 3-parameter tool with undocumented schema.

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 clearly states the action (export) and the resource (metadata json from Aseprite file). It is distinct from sibling export tools like aseprite_export_frames which export frames, but could be more specific about the types of metadata.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like aseprite_export_frames or aseprite_export_sheet. There are no prerequisites or context about typical use cases.

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