Skip to main content
Glama

Draw an animation

aseprite_animation

Draw multiple animation frames in one call by specifying only changed pixels per frame; automatically copies the previous frame and places reusable stamps.

Instructions

Draws several frames in ONE call, each as a pixel map, creating missing frames automatically. With copyPrevious (default) a new frame starts as a copy of the previous one, so each entry only needs the changed rows (use x/y and '.' to leave pixels unchanged; '.' never erases, map a key to '#00000000' for that). Parts that repeat across frames (head, body …) belong in stamps, placed per frame with place: [name, x, y]. For generated animations write frames/palette/stamps to a .json file and pass file. Returns the sprite status.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fileNoAbsolute path of a .json file: an array of frames, or an object with frames/palette/stamps/duration; inline arguments override it
layerNoLayer name (default: active layer)
startNoFrame number of the first entry
framesNoOne entry per frame (required unless file is given)
stampsNoReusable pixel maps: {"name": {"rows": [...], "palette"?: {...}}}
paletteNoPalette shared by all frames
durationNoDefault duration of every drawn frame, in seconds
paletteNameNoName of a palette saved with aseprite_palette
copyPreviousNoNew frames start as a copy of the previous frame

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.6.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 transparently explains key behaviors: new frames start as copies of the previous one (copyPrevious default), '.' leaves pixels unchanged and never erases, transparent pixels can be set via '#00000000', and stamps are placed per frame. It also mentions the return value (sprite status). This is a solid effort, though it does not address potential side effects like overwriting existing frame content or requiring specific permissions.

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 information-dense but not overly verbose. The main purpose is front-loaded ('Draws several frames in ONE call'), and subsequent sentences each add meaningful usage details. It avoids redundancy with the schema and stays focused. A slightly more compact phrasing could be achieved, but the current structure is clear and efficient.

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?

The tool is complex, with nested objects for frames, stamps, and palettes. The description covers the core usage patterns (inline frames, file-based generation, stamps, copyPrevious) and explicitly states the return value ('Returns the sprite status'). It does not mention error conditions or limitations, but given the absence of an output schema and the richness of the input schema, the description is sufficiently complete for an agent to call the 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds significant semantic value beyond the schema, particularly for the 'frames' and 'stamps' parameters: it explains the meaning of x/y and '.' for leaving pixels unchanged, the non-erasing property of '.', and the transparent color convention. It also clarifies how stamps are used with 'place'. This goes well beyond the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 states a clear purpose: drawing several frames in a single call, with the automatic creation of missing frames. This distinguishes it from single-frame drawing tools like aseprite_draw, though it does not explicitly name any sibling. The verb 'draws' and resource 'frames' are specific, but the differentiation from aseprite_batch (which also handles multiple operations) is implicit rather than explicit.

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 provides practical usage guidance: it explains how to use copyPrevious for incremental changes, how to use stamps for repeating parts, and how to pass a .json file for generated animations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., aseprite_draw for single frames, or aseprite_batch for batch operations), nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions that would route the agent away from it.

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