rawtherapee-mcp-server

by lucamarien

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

apply_lut

Apply a HaldCLUT film simulation LUT to a RawTherapee PP3 profile, controlling blend intensity from 0 to 100.

Instructions

Apply a HaldCLUT film simulation LUT to a PP3 profile.

Writes the [Film Simulation] section into the profile. lut_name is the relative path from RT_HALDCLUT_DIR, e.g. 'Fuji/Fuji Velvia 50.png'. strength controls blend intensity (0-100). Params: profile_path, lut_name, strength (0-100), save_as

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": {
      "profile_path": "<profile_path>",
      "lut_name": "<lut_name>"
    },
    "name": "apply_lut"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`profile_path`	Yes
`lut_name`	Yes
`strength`	No
`save_as`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.4May 26, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The description reveals that the tool writes the [Film Simulation] section, adding behavioral context. However, it does not disclose side effects, irreversibility, or permissions needed. With no annotations, the description should provide more, but it is adequate.

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 four sentences logically ordered: purpose, then detail, then parameter hints, then parameter listing. No wasted words, but could be more streamlined.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description need not explain returns. However, it omits guidance on save_as default behavior and edge cases. Among many sibling tools, the description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies lut_name as relative path from RT_HALDCLUT_DIR and strength as blend intensity (0-100), but profile_path and save_as remain unexplained. Partial compensation.

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 tool applies a HaldCLUT film simulation LUT to a PP3 profile and writes the [Film Simulation] section. It is specific in verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like preview_lut or preview_lut_comparison.

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 gives usage hints for lut_name path and strength range, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no when-not or prerequisites mentioned.

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

Deploy Server