aseprite-ai-artist

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Cels

cel

Destructive

Manage animation cels by listing, creating, clearing, deleting, moving, copying, linking, unlinking, or setting position and opacity per layer and frame.

Instructions

Manage cels — one layer's image on one frame. Ops: 'list', 'create', 'clear', 'delete', 'move', 'copy', 'link', 'unlink', 'set' (position/opacity). 'move' is how you shift a whole limb between frames without redrawing it; 'link' shares one image across frames so a static part of a cycle stays in sync.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`x`	No	Cel origin, for 'set' and 'move'.
`y`	No
`dx`	No	Relative move.
`dy`	No
`op`	Yes
`frame`	No	1-based frame number. Omit to use the active frame.
`layer`	No	Layer name. Omit to use the active layer.
`frames`	No	For 'link' across a range.
`sprite`	No	Which sprite: its id as '#7' (what every result reports back, and the only unambiguous form — two unsaved documents are both called 'Sprite'), its filename, or its display name. Omit to use the sprite Aseprite has focused.
`opacity`	No
`toFrame`	No
`toLayer`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cels`	No
`sprite`	Yes
`applied`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.6Sep 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / sprite / description

Previous value: -"Sprite filename or id. Omit to use the sprite Aseprite has focused."New value: +"Which sprite: its id as '#7' (what every result reports back, and the only unambiguous form — two unsaved documents are both called 'Sprite'), its filename, or its display name. Omit to use the sprite Aseprite has focused."

First observedv0.1.0Sep 8, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description does not add any behavioral context beyond that—it never mentions that ops like 'delete' or 'clear' are destructive, nor does it describe consequences or required permissions. It adds no value beyond what annotations already convey.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core concept (cel definition and op list). It avoids fluff and gives targeted hints for two ops. However, it could be better structured by separating op descriptions, but overall it's efficiently written.

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 tool with 12 parameters and 9 operations. The description is far too brief to guide correct invocation—it does not explain how parameters map to each op, error conditions, or operational nuances. While an output schema exists, the description still needs to clarify usage per op, which it largely omits. The tool demands far more detail.

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 50%, meaning several parameters (y, dy, opacity, toFrame, toLayer) lack descriptions in the schema. The tool description does not compensate; it only lists ops and explains two of them. It provides no additional meaning for the parameters, leaving a significant gap for the agent.

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 tool manages cels (one layer's image on one frame) and lists the supported operations. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on cel-level operations, though it does not explicitly name alternatives. The core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Provides useful context for 'move' and 'link' (shifting limbs between frames, sharing images across frames), which helps select those ops. However, it gives no guidance on when to use the tool vs alternatives, when not to use specific ops, or prerequisites. The guidance is selective and not comprehensive.

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

Deploy Server