Generate an image from a text prompt and save it to a specified output file.
Generate an image from a prompt and write it to the output reference.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prompt | Yes | ||
| output_ref | Yes | ||
| size | No | ||
| background | No | ||
| quality | No | ||
| format | No | ||
| overwrite | No | ||
| seed | No | ||
| safety | No | ||
| model | No | ||
| output_headers | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic action but doesn't disclose side effects, error behavior, or output structure beyond writing to a reference.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is very concise at 12 words, but it is under-specified for a tool with 11 parameters. It does not earn its place as it omits critical details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter details, usage context, and behavioral notes.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage and 11 parameters, the description adds no meaning to any parameter. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action 'generate an image' and specifies writing to the output reference. It distinguishes from sibling tools like image_analyze and image_edit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like image_edit or which model to choose. No mention of prerequisites or context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/soyrochus/m3cp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server