Magic Hour MCP Server

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

ai_clothes_changer_create_image

Replace a person's outfit in a photo with a garment image. Provide person and garment photos, optionally select clothing type for upper, lower, or full outfit swaps.

Instructions

Change outfits in photos in seconds with just a photo reference. Each photo costs 25 credits.

MCP guidance:

This starts an async image generation job and returns id plus credits_charged immediately. If the user wants the finished result, call the wait_for_image_project helper with the returned id, or poll the matching GET /v1/image-projects/{id} endpoint until status is complete, error, or canceled. Completed projects include downloads with direct URLs. The custom wait helper also returns exact_download_urls separately from expiration metadata.
For *_file_path values, prefer an existing Magic Hour file path or a file_path returned by the upload-URL endpoint after the file bytes are uploaded. Direct public media URLs may work when they are stable, fetchable, and return raw file bytes, but hotlinked URLs can fail; when in doubt, use the presigned upload flow first and pass the returned file_path.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No	Give your image a custom name for easy identification.	Clothes Changer - dateTime
`assets`	Yes	Provide the assets for clothes changer

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Unique ID of the image. Use it with the [Get image Project API](https://docs.magichour.ai/api-reference/image-projects/get-image-details) to fetch status and downloads.
`credits_charged`	Yes	The amount of credits deducted from your account to generate the image. We charge credits right when the request is made. If an error occurred while generating the image(s), credits will be refunded and this field will be updated to include the refund.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and succeeds: it discloses the async job model, immediate id and credits_charged return, terminal statuses, downloads behavior, and the 25-credit cost. It even highlights that the wait helper returns exact_download_urls separately from expiration metadata.

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 compact and organized with a purpose statement followed by two scoped bullets. The only minor issue is the slightly promotional 'just a photo reference' phrasing, which is less precise than the schema's actual requirement of a person file and a garment file.

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 async image-generation flow and lack of annotations, the description covers the end-to-end lifecycle: initiation, waiting, completion, downloads, and file input policy. The presence of an output schema fills in return-value details, so no critical gap remains for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The input schema already covers all parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful operational guidance for *_file_path values: prefer existing Magic Hour paths or upload-URL file_paths, and use the presigned upload flow when hotlinked URLs are questionable. This goes beyond the schema's basic 'either URL or file_path' text.

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 opening sentence names a specific verb ('change') and resource ('outfits in photos'), making the tool's domain unmistakable. It implicitly differentiates this tool from sibling image-creation tools like face_swap_photo_create_image and head_swap_create_image.

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?

The MCP guidance explicitly tells the agent what to do after invocation: use wait_for_image_project with the returned id or poll until a terminal status. It also gives file-path policy, preferring Magic Hour file paths or upload-URL file_paths over unstable hotlinked URLs. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings like body_swap_create_image, though the use case is clear from the purpose.

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

Deploy Server