Flux MCP Server

remix_image

Generate a Flux remix from a source image and prompt by creating a RunAPI task; returns task ID, status, and output URLs.

Instructions

Create a Flux task on RunAPI (remix image). Returns a task id, status, and output URLs.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wait`	No	Poll until the task reaches a terminal status.
`model`	No	RunAPI model slug for this model line.
`prompt`	Yes	Declared type: string.
`timeout_ms`	No
`aspect_ratio`	No	Declared type: string. Known values: "1:1", "4:3", "3:4", "16:9", "9:16", "3:2", "2:3".
`callback_url`	No	Declared type: string.
`output_count`	No	Declared type: integer. Known values: 1.
`poll_interval_ms`	No
`source_image_url`	Yes	Declared type: string.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed14 schema fields changedv0.2.0Oct 5, 2026
- changedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +{}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / aspect_ratio / description
```
Added value: +"Declared type: string. Known values: \"1:1\", \"4:3\", \"3:4\", \"16:9\", \"9:16\", \"3:2\", \"2:3\"."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / aspect_ratio / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  "1:1",
-  "4:3",
-  "3:4",
-  "16:9",
-  "9:16",
-  "3:2",
-  "2:3"
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / callback_url / description
```
Added value: +"Declared type: string."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / model / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  "flux-dev",
-  "flux-pro"
-]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / output_count / description
```
Added value: +"Declared type: integer. Known values: 1."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / output_count / enum
```
Removed value: -[
-  1
-]
```
- changedInput schema / properties / output_count / type
```
Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / poll_interval_ms / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
- addedInput schema / properties / prompt / description
```
Added value: +"Declared type: string."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / prompt / maxLength
```
Removed value: -5000
```
- removedInput schema / properties / prompt / minLength
```
Removed value: -3
```
- addedInput schema / properties / source_image_url / description
```
Added value: +"Declared type: string."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / timeout_ms / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
First observedv0.1.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It mentions the return shape (task id, status, output URLs), which is useful, but says nothing about async/polling semantics, the meaning of the 'wait' flag, callback behavior, auth requirements, or side effects of creating a remote task.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short sentences with no filler; the action is front-loaded and the return-value note earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 9-parameter async task-creation tool with no annotations, the description is thin: it omits the create-then-poll workflow, the role of the sibling get_task, and any failure/timeout behavior. The mention of returned task id/status/output URLs partially compensates for the absent output schema.

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 78%, so the schema already documents most parameters (wait, model, aspect_ratio, output_count, etc.). The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a Flux task on RunAPI (remix image)') and names the model line, which helps distinguish it from the sibling text_to_image. The parenthetical 'remix image' is somewhat terse about what remixing means, but the core action is clear.

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 on when to use this versus text_to_image, nor any mention of the relationship with get_task for retrieving results. The agent must infer the usage context from the name alone.

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

Deploy Server

remix_image

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools