Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Pixel Art MCP

Pixel Art MCP

by uncagedspirit
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

pixelate_image

Convert any image into pixel art by downscaling and reducing colors. Specify output size and color count for customized results.

Instructions

Pixelate an existing image into matching pixel art (downscale + quantize).

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": {
      "in_path": "<in_path>",
      "out_path": "<out_path>"
    },
    "name": "pixelate_image"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
in_pathYes
out_pathYes
widthNo
heightNo
colorsNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions downscale+quantize but omits important behaviors: whether original image is modified, file format handling, permission requirements, or error conditions.

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?

Single sentence, efficient. Could be improved with structured format (e.g., bullet points for parameters) but is not verbose.

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?

With 5 parameters and 0% schema coverage, description is too sparse. No details on output format, error handling, or usage examples; output schema exists but is not reflected.

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 0%; description adds no parameter-specific meaning. It loosely refers to 'downscale+quantize' but does not connect width/height/colors to those operations.

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?

Description clearly states it pixelates an existing image via downscale and quantize, distinguishing from sibling generate_pixel_art which generates from scratch. However, it could be more explicit about the distinction.

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 tool vs. generate_pixel_art or other alternatives. 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools