Skip to main content
Glama

John's Essentials

by com.johnsessentials

photo_image_splitter

Image Splitter — Split an image into a grid of equal tiles (e.g. 2x2, 3x3). [category: photo]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
colsNoColumns, 1-8. The rightmost column absorbs remainder px, so tile widths can differ slightly.
fileYesImage to split — JPG, PNG, WebP, or BMP (max 30 MB). Output is ALWAYS a ZIP of tiles, even for tiny grids.
rowsNoRows, 1-8. The bottom row absorbs remainder px. rows x cols tiles come back in one ZIP.
output_formatNoOptional tile format; defaults to the input format.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description adds the grid-tile behavior but little else beyond the annotations. It does not disclose key behavioral details such as output always being a ZIP, remainder-pixel handling, or whether the original file is preserved; those details live in the schema parameter descriptions instead.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that communicates the core behavior and gives useful examples. The category tag is minimal and does not add noise.

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 description names the tool's purpose and the schema fills in parameter details like format limits, row/column constraints, and ZIP output. No output schema exists, but the description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool produces at a high level.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the 2x2/3x3 grid examples, which is enough to meet the baseline for high coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action and resource: split an image into a grid of equal tiles, with concrete examples. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like photo_crop, photo_image_diff, or photo_collage.

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 implies the tool is for slicing images into grids but does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives such as photo_crop or photo_collage_mosaic. There is no exclusionary guidance or mention of alternative tools.

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

All John's Essentials toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tool pairs are near-identical: octopus_mkdir/octopus_make_folder and octopus_move/octopus_move_file are literal duplicates, analyze_hash/generate_hash both compute hashes, convert_word_to_pdf overlaps convert_document, and photo_compress/photo_compress_to_size plus pdf_thumbnails/pdf_to_images have fuzzy boundaries. The descriptions are detailed and cross-reference each other helpfully, but at 144 tools an agent will regularly misselect.

Naming Consistency3/5

The dominant {category}_{verb}_{object} snake_case pattern (pdf_*, photo_*, convert_*, analyze_*, media_*) is largely consistent and predictable. However, outliers like chatwithyourpdf and describe_image break the category-prefix convention, and the octopus namespace mixes bare verbs (read, write, mkdir) with verb_noun forms (make_folder, move_file, search_meta) inconsistently.

Tool Count2/5

144 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server. The broad scope (PDF, photo, video, audio, conversion, analysis, generation, file storage, web, e-sign) justifies some volume, but the count is inflated by batch and inspect variants (pdf_to_excel + batch + inspect), duplicate tools, and overlapping converters. An agent faces an overwhelming selection surface.

Completeness4/5

Per-domain coverage is remarkably deep: PDF spans merge/split/compress/protect/unlock/metadata/OCR/watermark and bidirectional conversion; photo covers editing, format conversion, face handling, OCR, and collage; file storage has full CRUD plus search. Minor gaps exist (no audio transcription, no video metadata editing, no deletion of PDF pages is actually covered via pdf_delete_pages) but the surface has no dead ends for its declared domains.

Resources