Skip to main content
Glama
xiaobenyang-com

Logo-Analyze

by xiaobenyang-com
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

Logo提取处理工具 Logo Analyze

一个智能Logo提取和处理的MCP服务器，支持从网站URL自动识别并提取Logo图标，并提供图像处理和矢量转换功能。 An MCP server for intelligent logo extraction and processing, supporting automatic recognition and extraction of logo icons from website URLs, and providing image processing and vector conversion functions.## 工具列表 Tool List

本MCP服务封装下列工具，可让模型通过标准化接口调用以下功能。 本MCP服务封装下列工具，可让模型通过标准化接口调用以下功能。

工具 Tool

描述 Description

get_best_logo_url

从网站提取并返回最佳Logo的URL地址，适用于只需要获取最佳Logo URL的场景

analyze_logo

分析Logo的基本信息（尺寸、格式、质量等），支持onlyBestUrl参数只返回最佳Logo的URL

检查服务 ## Inspector

工具在线测试： https://mcp.xiaobenyang.com/inspector/1777316659872771

Online Tool test https://mcp.xiaobenyang.com/inspector/1777316659872771

Related MCP server: Stamp it

服务配置 MCP Server Config

如何获取 XBY-APIKEY ？ How to get XBY-APIKEY ?

访问小笨羊科技网站 https://xiaobenyang.com，注册用户即可获得APIKEY Visit XiaoBenYang website https://xiaobenyang.com, register and get the APIKEY.

SSE

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "Logo提取处理工具": {
      "headers": {
        "XBY-APIKEY": "<YOUR_XBY_APIKEY>"
      },
      "type": "sse",
      "url": "https://mcp.xiaobenyang.com/1777316659872771/sse"
    }
  }
}

STREAMABLE HTTP

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "Logo提取处理工具": {
      "headers": {
        "XBY-APIKEY": "<YOUR_XBY_APIKEY>"
      },
      "type": "streamable_http",
      "url": "https://mcp.xiaobenyang.com/1777316659872771/mcp"
    }
  }
}

STDIO

{
    "mcpServers": {
        "Logo提取处理工具": {
          "command": "npx",
          "args": [
            "-y",
            "xiaobenyang-mcp"
          ],
          "env": {
            "XBY_APIKEY": "<YOUR_XBY_APIKEY>",
            "mcpId": "1777316659872771",
          },
          "transport": "stdio"
        }
      }
}

Available Tools

2 tools
get_best_logo_urlget_best_logo_urlC

从网站提取并返回最佳Logo的URL地址，适用于只需要获取最佳Logo URL的场景

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions extraction and returning a URL, but doesn't describe how 'best' is determined, potential errors (e.g., if no logo is found), rate limits, or authentication needs. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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, consisting of a single sentence that states the core purpose. There's no wasted text, though it could be slightly more informative without losing efficiency.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (extracting a 'best' logo from a website), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the extraction logic, return format, error handling, or other behavioral aspects needed for effective use.

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?

The input schema has 1 parameter (url) with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the parameter. It doesn't explain what the 'url' input represents (e.g., website URL to analyze), expected format, or constraints, failing to compensate for the low 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: '从网站提取并返回最佳Logo的URL地址' (extract and return the best logo URL from a website). It specifies the verb (extract/return) and resource (logo URL), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'analyze_logo' beyond stating it's for scenarios where only the best logo URL is needed.

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 some usage context: '适用于只需要获取最佳Logo URL的场景' (suitable for scenarios where only the best logo URL needs to be obtained). This implies when to use it (when you just need the URL) but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention the sibling tool 'analyze_logo' as an alternative for more detailed analysis.

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.

  1. 2 tool updates
    • First observedanalyze_logo
    • First observedget_best_logo_url
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation2/5

The two tools have significant overlap in purpose, as both can return the best logo URL. 'analyze_logo' does this optionally via a parameter, while 'get_best_logo_url' is dedicated to it, creating ambiguity about which to use for that specific task. Their descriptions suggest different primary functions (analysis vs. extraction), but the shared capability blurs the boundaries.

Naming Consistency4/5

Both tools use a clear verb_noun pattern ('analyze_logo' and 'get_best_logo_url'), making them readable and predictable. The naming is mostly consistent, with minor deviations in verb choice ('analyze' vs. 'get') that reflect their different focuses but don't break the overall pattern.

Tool Count2/5

With only 2 tools, the server feels under-scoped for a logo analysis domain. This limited set may not cover essential operations like logo validation, comparison, or batch processing, making it thin and potentially incomplete for typical agent workflows in this area.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface has significant gaps for logo analysis. It lacks basic CRUD operations (e.g., no upload, delete, or update tools) and misses common functionalities like logo format conversion, color analysis, or batch processing. The two tools provide limited coverage, likely causing agent failures in broader tasks.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers