gimp-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Inspect text layer

gimp_inspect_text

Read-only

Inspect a GIMP text item to retrieve its text, font, size and unit, color, justification, spacing, antialiasing, and geometry for precise layer analysis.

Instructions

Text, font, size and unit, color, justification, spacing, antialiasing and geometry.

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": {
      "item": "<item>"
    },
    "name": "gimp_inspect_text"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`item`	Yes	Item id (layer, group, mask...) e.g. 'item:5@a1b2c3d4'.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`x`	Yes
`y`	Yes
`font`	Yes
`item`	Yes
`size`	Yes
`text`	Yes
`color`	Yes	#rrggbb (sRGB).
`width`	Yes
`height`	Yes
`justify`	Yes
`antialias`	Yes
`size_unit`	Yes	'px' (pixels) or 'pt' (points, converted with the image resolution).
`line_spacing`	Yes	Extra pixels between lines.
`letter_spacing`	Yes	Extra pixels between letters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 7, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond a field list — nothing about what an invalid or non-text item returns, or how geometry is expressed, even though an output schema exists to cover return values.

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?

It is short and free of padding, but it is a sentence fragment rather than a front-loaded statement of purpose. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema covering return shape, the minimum is nearly met. What is missing is the core statement of purpose and any hint about routing among the many sibling inspect/tool families.

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 100% for the single 'item' parameter, including its id format, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no meaning about what kinds of items are accepted (layer vs. group vs. mask) or whether non-text items are valid.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description is a bare noun list ('Text, font, size and unit, color...') with no verb and no resource statement; only the name and title establish that this reads a text layer's properties. The enumerated fields do imply a read of text-layer attributes, but the definition never says so and never distinguishes itself from siblings such as gimp_inspect_item or gimp_inspect_image.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusion of alternatives, and no prerequisite stated. An agent must infer on its own that this is the tool for text layers specifically versus the generic gimp_inspect_item.

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

Deploy Server