What can you do with this server?

This server provides AI agents with direct access to Topaz image and video upscaling via RunAPI, along with task management and pricing tools. * Upscale images (upscale_image): Submit an image for upscaling with factors of 1×, 2×, 4×, or 8×. Optionally wait for completion to receive the task ID, status, and output URLs. * Upscale videos (upscale_video): Submit a video for upscaling with factors of 1×, 2×, or 4×. Optionally wait for completion to receive results. * Check task status (get_task): Fetch the current status and latest result payload for any existing upscaling task using its task ID. * Check pricing (check_pricing): Retrieve current pricing for Topaz models and endpoints (topaz-upscale-image or topaz-upscale-video) — no API key required. * Flexible execution: Choose to either immediately return a task ID or poll until the task reaches a terminal status using the wait parameter.

How do I use Topaz MCP Server?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Topaz MCP Server Upscale this image and wait for it to finish." That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

Topaz MCP Server

by runapi-ai

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Score Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Remote

Why This Package?

@runapi.ai/topaz-mcp is a focused Model Context Protocol server for the Topaz model line on RunAPI. It gives MCP-compatible assistants direct access to 2 endpoints and 2 model variants without loading the full RunAPI catalog.

Use this per-model server when an agent should stay scoped to Topaz. Use @runapi.ai/mcp when one assistant should discover every RunAPI model line.

Related MCP server: grok-imagine-mcp

Install

Add it to Claude Code:

claude mcp add topaz -s user -- npx -y @runapi.ai/topaz-mcp

Use project scope when the server should be shared with a repository:

claude mcp add topaz -s project -- npx -y @runapi.ai/topaz-mcp

Codex, Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code, Roo Code, and other MCP hosts can use the same stdio command:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "topaz": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "@runapi.ai/topaz-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

check_pricing works before sign-in. For task creation and status polling, ask your assistant to call the login tool. It opens a browser login and saves credentials to ~/.config/runapi/config.json, the same file used by runapi login. Headless and CI hosts can still set RUNAPI_API_KEY before starting the MCP host.

Ready-made examples are in examples/ for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code, and Roo Code.

Tools

Tool	Auth	Purpose
`upscale_image`	Yes	Create a Topaz upscale image task and optionally wait for a terminal status. Returns the task id, status, and output URLs.
`upscale_video`	Yes	Create a Topaz upscale video task and optionally wait for a terminal status. Returns the task id, status, and output URLs.
`get_task`	Yes	Fetch the current status and latest payload for an existing task.
`check_pricing`	No	Look up current pricing for a Topaz model and endpoint.

Models

Topaz covers 2 model variants across 2 endpoints. Each tool accepts the models listed for it:

Tool	Models
`upscale_image`	`topaz-upscale-image`
`upscale_video`	`topaz-upscale-video`

Model availability can change between releases. Use check_pricing or the Topaz model page for the current catalog view.

Agent Prompts

Ask your assistant in natural language; it can inspect pricing, create the task, and return the task id plus output URLs.

Create a task

Run a Topaz upscale image task with RunAPI.

The assistant can call check_pricing, then upscale_image, and return the task id, status, and output URLs.

Submit without waiting

Create the task but don't wait for it to finish.

The assistant calls the create tool with wait: false and returns the task id. Check on it later with get_task.

Check pricing before creating

Check current Topaz pricing, then create the task if it matches my request.

The assistant calls check_pricing and can link to the Topaz model page for the canonical catalog entry.

Configuration

The server resolves auth in this order:

RUNAPI_API_KEY environment variable, useful for headless and CI hosts
~/.config/runapi/config.json, created by the MCP login tool or runapi login
No key, which still allows check_pricing

The config file is normally managed by login. A pre-provisioned headless config can use:

{
  "apiKey": "your_runapi_key"
}

Do not commit real API keys.

Links

Resource	URL
Topaz model page	https://runapi.ai/models/topaz
npm package	@runapi.ai/topaz-mcp
GitHub repository	runapi-ai/topaz-mcp
RunAPI MCP overview	runapi.ai/mcp
RunAPI docs	runapi.ai/docs

License

Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0.

Available Tools

5 tools

check_pricingB

Look up RunAPI pricing for the topaz model line.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`model`	No	Model slug. Defaults to the line's primary model.
`action`	No	Endpoint name. Defaults to the endpoint that offers the model.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It only indicates a read operation ('look up pricing') but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens with invalid inputs.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence that is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every word adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having two parameters with enums and no output schema, the description provides no information about return values, error handling, or pricing structure. The tool likely requires more context for effective usage.

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%, with each parameter (model, action) already described in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for this dimension.

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 looks up RunAPI pricing for the topaz model line. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('look up pricing') and distinguishes from sibling tools (get_task, upscale_image, upscale_video) which are unrelated to pricing.

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 implies usage for pricing queries but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or context for when not to use it.

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

get_taskA

Fetch the current status and latest result payload for a topaz task.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`action`	Yes	Asynchronous endpoint the task was created on.
`task_id`	Yes	Task id returned when the task was created.

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does ('Fetch current status and latest result payload') but does not clarify side effects, error behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The verb 'fetch' implies a read operation, but this is not explicitly stated and adds little behavioral context beyond the purpose.

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?

The description is a single sentence of 10 words, concise and front-loaded with the action ('Fetch current status and latest result payload'). Every word contributes to clarity with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema covers parameters well, but the description omits important context such as authentication prerequisites (given a login sibling tool) and potential error scenarios. There is no output schema, so the description's mention of 'latest result payload' provides some return information, but overall completeness is adequate with clear gaps.

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%, with both parameters (task_id, action) clearly described in the input schema. The tool description does not add additional parameter meaning, but the schema suffices, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('current status and latest result payload for a topaz task'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like upscale_image/upscale_video (which likely create tasks) and check_pricing. It unambiguously communicates the tool's function.

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 implies usage (fetching task status after creation) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like authentication. It provides no when-not-to-use guidance, so usage is only implied by the tool's purpose.

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

loginA

Authenticate RunAPI by opening a browser PKCE login flow and saving the API key to ~/.config/runapi/config.json.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`force`	No	Re-run browser login when the current credential comes from the local config file.

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the interactive browser flow and the file write side effect (config.json). However, it does not mention that it may overwrite existing credentials or that it could block waiting for user input, though these are implied.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Authenticate RunAPI') and provides necessary details without extraneous information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple login tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and side effect. It lacks an explicit statement that this is a prerequisite for other tools, but that is implied.

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% (the only parameter 'force' has a description). The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Authenticate'), target resource ('RunAPI'), method ('browser PKCE login flow'), and side effect (saving to config.json). It is distinct from sibling tools, none of which relate to authentication.

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 implies usage (to authenticate RunAPI) but does not explicitly say when to run it (e.g., before other RunAPI tools) or when to use the 'force' parameter. Since there are no alternative auth tools among siblings, 'vs alternatives' is not applicable.

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

upscale_imageB

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

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wait`	No	Poll until the task reaches a terminal status.
`model`	No	RunAPI model slug for this model line.
`timeout_ms`	No
`callback_url`	No	Webhook URL for terminal Task delivery.
`upscale_factor`	Yes	Image upscale multiplier.
`poll_interval_ms`	No
`source_image_url`	Yes	Public source image URL.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions returns (task id, status, output URLs) but does not clarify the asynchronous nature of task creation, whether the returned URLs are immediate or after completion, or any error conditions. The presence of wait, poll_interval_ms, and callback_url parameters indicates async behavior, but the description omits this crucial context.

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 a single sentence of 16 words, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word earns its place, but it omits essential behavioral details needed for correct invocation, which prevents a 5. Still, it avoids fluff and is efficiently structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite the schema covering many parameters, the tool has 7 parameters including async-related fields, and no annotations or output schema are provided. The description fails to explain the task lifecycle (e.g., polling or webhooks), the fact that results are not immediate, or what happens on failure. This is insufficient for a complex asynchronous tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 71%, which is moderate but under the 80% threshold for a baseline of 3. The description adds no parameter-level insight, and the schema leaves timeout_ms and poll_interval_ms undocumented. The description's 'Returns a task id, status, and output URLs' vaguely implies outputs but does not clarify how parameters affect behavior.

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's function: 'Create a Topaz task on RunAPI (upscale image).' The verb 'create' is specific, and the parenthetical disambiguates the resource as an image upscaling task. This effectively distinguishes the tool from its sibling upscale_video, which is for video upscaling.

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 implies usage for image upscaling via the phrase 'upscale image,' and the sibling context (upscale_video) suggests when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, there is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance, nor any mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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

upscale_videoC

Create a Topaz task on RunAPI (upscale video). Returns a task id, status, and output URLs.

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wait`	No	Poll until the task reaches a terminal status.
`model`	No	RunAPI model slug for this model line.
`timeout_ms`	No
`callback_url`	No	Webhook URL for terminal Task delivery.
`upscale_factor`	No	Video upscale multiplier.
`poll_interval_ms`	No
`source_video_url`	Yes	Public source video URL.

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the return value (task id, status, output URLs) but omits critical traits like asynchronous execution, polling/callback behavior, pricing implications, or any side effects. It does not disclose whether the task runs synchronously or how the video is processed.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and return information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function without unnecessary filler. It earns its place by being concise and factual.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

This is a complex asynchronous tool with 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description only covers basic creation and return. It omits usage context, distinction from upscale_image, and behavioral semantics like polling or webhooks. The description is inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's workflow and prerequisites.

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 coverage is 71%, with descriptions for source_video_url, model, callback_url, upscale_factor, and additionalProperties. The description adds no parameter-level details, and the undocumented parameters (wait, timeout_ms, poll_interval_ms) remain unexplained by both schema and description. Since the schema covers most parameters, the baseline is acceptable, but no extra value is provided.

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 action (create a Topaz task) and the domain (upscale video on RunAPI). It distinguishes from the sibling upscale_image by explicitly mentioning video. However, it doesn't explicitly say 'upscales a video file' as the primary purpose, relying on the parenthetical and tool name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like upscale_image. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about whether to choose this over the image variant. The description only states what it does, not when it should be chosen.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

3 tool updatesv0.1.7Aug 5, 2026

Changedget_task1 field changed

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"Endpoint the task was created on."New value: +"Asynchronous endpoint the task was created on."

Changedupscale_image5 fields changed

addedInput schema / properties / callback_url

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Webhook URL for terminal Task delivery.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / source_image_url / description
```
Added value: +"Public source image URL."
```
addedInput schema / properties / source_image_url / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
addedInput schema / properties / upscale_factor / description
```
Added value: +"Image upscale multiplier."
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "upscale_factor"
-]New value: +[
+  "source_image_url",
+  "upscale_factor"
+]

Changedupscale_video5 fields changed
- addedInput schema / properties / callback_url
```
Added value: +{
+  "description": "Webhook URL for terminal Task delivery.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
- addedInput schema / properties / source_video_url / description
```
Added value: +"Public source video URL."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / source_video_url / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / upscale_factor / description
```
Added value: +"Video upscale multiplier."
```
- addedInput schema / required
```
Added value: +[
+  "source_video_url"
+]
```

1 tool updatev0.1.6Jul 11, 2026
- Addedlogin
4 tool updatesv0.1.1Jun 24, 2026
- First observedcheck_pricing
- First observedget_task
- First observedupscale_image
- First observedupscale_video

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Scored 2026-09-09 18:20 across 5 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a clear, distinct action: authentication, creating an upscale task for a specific media type, retrieving task status, and checking pricing. The two upscale tools differ only by media type, which is explicitly stated in their names and descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (upscale_image, upscale_video, get_task, check_pricing). The lone 'login' is a minor deviation but still clearly communicates its action, so the overall naming remains predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a niche server focused on Topaz upscaling through RunAPI. Each tool serves a necessary step in the workflow without unnecessary bloat.

Completeness4/5

The core workflow of authenticating, submitting upscale tasks, and polling results is covered. Missing task cancellation or listing is a minor gap but does not break the primary use case.

Maintenance

ActivitySlowing

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

runapi-mcpOAuth
io.github.runapi-builder
130+ AI models for image, video, music, and audio — 18 model families, one RunAPI account.
AI & Machine Learning Multimedia Processing
155
Pipe2.ai A
ai.pipe2
Run multi-step AI pipelines for video, image, audio and text: upload media, run, poll results.
AI & Machine Learning Multimedia Processing
51
ModelRunnerOAuth
ai.modelrunner
Run 100+ AI models — image, video, audio, 3D — through one API with pay-per-use billing.
AI & Machine Learning Multimedia Processing
2
mcp A
com.unifically
One API for 100+ AI video, image, music and speech models.
AI & Machine Learning Image & Video Processing Audio Processing
141

Related MCP Servers

GPT Image MCP Server
Image & Video Processing AI & Machine Learning
runapi-ai
A
license
B
quality
A
maintenance
Enables creating and managing GPT Image tasks (edit and text-to-image) via RunAPI, with options to poll status and check pricing.
Updated a month ago (2026-07-31 09:32 UTC)
5
107
Apache 2.0
grok-imagine-mcp
AI & Machine Learning Image & Video Processing
runapi-ai
A
license
B
quality
A
maintenance
Enables AI image and video generation tasks (text-to-image, image-to-video, edit, upscale, etc.) via RunAPI, with support for polling and pricing lookups.
Updated 7 days ago (2026-09-04 10:59 UTC)
10
280
Apache 2.0
@runapi.ai/happyhorse-mcpofficial
AI & Machine Learning Multimedia Processing Image & Video Processing
runapi-ai
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
Enables creating and managing HappyHorse video generation tasks (edit, image-to-video, text-to-video) via RunAPI, with optional polling for completion and pricing lookup.
Updated a month ago (2026-07-31 09:34 UTC)
6
69
Apache 2.0
@runapi.ai/luma-mcp
Image & Video Processing Multimedia Processing
runapi-ai
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
Enables creating and polling Luma video modification tasks, fetching task status, and checking pricing via the RunAPI API.
Updated a month ago (2026-07-31 09:36 UTC)
4
68
Apache 2.0

Why This Package?

Install

Tools

Models

Agent Prompts

Create a task

Submit without waiting

Check pricing before creating

Configuration

Links

License

Available Tools

Tool Schema Changelog

Maintenance

Resources

Looking for Admin?

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

@runapi.ai/happyhorse-mcpofficial