Skip to main content
Glama

Render preview

render_preview
Read-only

Generate a PNG preview of an SVG document to visually inspect its current state. Optionally set width for scaling and receive an inline image for immediate feedback.

Instructions

Render a PNG preview of the whole document into the artifacts dir.

When to use: a quick visual check of the whole document. For a final file use `export_document`;
for one object use `export_object`; for an ordered run series use `capture_frame`.

Key params: `width_px` scales the raster (height follows the document aspect ratio); omit for
intrinsic size. Oversized requests are rejected before Inkscape runs. `name` tags the file
(successive calls do NOT clobber, — each render gets a unique frame name). INLINE RASTER

: by default the PNG is also returned as an MCP image block so the agent SEES it without a second Read; gated by max_output_bytes (~5 MiB default) and skipped for an oversized render; inline=False returns only the structured result.

Return shape: `PreviewResult` — `artifact_path` / `workspace_relative_path` (same root-relative
value), `format`, `width_px`/`height_px` (TRUE on-disk size), `stale`. With an inline
image, a `ToolResult` carrying the same structured fields plus the image block.

Example: `render_preview(doc_id, width_px=512)`

Risk class: low (render/export to artifact dir; no original overwrite).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
doc_idYes
inlineNo
width_pxNo
max_output_bytesNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
staleNo
doc_idYes
formatYes
width_pxYes
all_blankNo
height_pxYes
opaque_pxNo
artifact_pathYes
workspace_relative_pathYes
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true (safe read) and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: risk class 'low' with rationale (render/export to artifact dir, no original overwrite), behavior on oversized requests (rejected before Inkscape runs), and that successive calls do not clobber (unique frame names). It also explains the inline image gating by max_output_bytes. Everything adds beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with clear sections (purpose, when to use, key params, return shape, example, risk class). It front-loads the core purpose, then adds detail in a logical order. However, it is somewhat lengthy (8 sentences), and might be slightly more concise by merging the return shape description into the param section. Still, 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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers everything needed: purpose, usage boundaries, parameter details, return shape (referencing output schema), an example call, and risk assessment. The output schema is mentioned but not redundantly detailed, which is appropriate since the schema itself provides structure. No gaps are apparent.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description bears full responsibility for parameter meaning. It covers all 5 parameters: width_px (scaling, omit for intrinsic), name (file tag, uniqueness), inline (boolean, default true, inline image behavior), max_output_bytes (gating threshold), and doc_id (implied required). Each parameter's effect and defaults are explained, providing complete 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 the tool renders a PNG preview of the whole document to the artifacts directory. It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly naming alternatives (export_document, export_object, capture_frame), making the specific resource and action obvious.

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 includes a dedicated 'When to use' section that specifies the scenario (quick visual check) and provides explicit guidance on when to use alternative tools for final files, single objects, or ordered runs. This leaves no ambiguity about appropriate invocation.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

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/jjjsood/inkscape-mcp-server'

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