Skip to main content
Glama

webbersites-x402-data-api

by io.github.webberdesign

post_generate_image

AI IMAGE GENERATION — POST {prompt} and get back a PNG, base64 in JSON (?raw=1 for raw bytes). Gemini 2.5 Flash Image (nano-banana): photoreal scenes, illustrations, product shots, UI mockups — renders text in images well. Optional {aspect_ratio}: 1:1 (default), 16:9, 9:16, 4:3 + 6 more. Reference images: pass {url} or {image_base64}, or up to 3 in {reference_images}, to edit, restyle, or compose ('put this product on this beach'). The x402 payment IS the auth. ($0.07 per call, paid via x402)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoOptional public URL of a reference image to edit/restyle instead of generating from scratch (png, jpeg, gif, webp; max 5 MB)
promptYesWhat to generate, up to 2,000 chars — subject, style, composition, lighting
aspect_ratioNo1:1 (default), 2:3, 3:2, 3:4, 4:3, 4:5, 5:4, 9:16, 16:9, or 21:9
image_base64NoAlternative to url: a reference image as base64 (data URI accepted)
reference_imagesNoUp to 3 reference images (URLs or base64 strings, 6 MB combined) to compose — product placement, style transfer, character consistency

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNogenerate or edit
bytesNo
modelNo
usageNo
content_typeNo
image_base64Nothe generated image as base64 — decode and save

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / image_base64 / description
      Previous value: -"Alternative to url: the image to edit as base64 (data URI accepted)"New value: +"Alternative to url: a reference image as base64 (data URI accepted)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / reference_images
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Up to 3 reference images (URLs or base64 strings, 6 MB combined) to compose — product placement, style transfer, character consistency",
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Previous value: -"Optional public image URL to edit instead of generating from scratch (png, jpeg, gif, webp; max 5 MB)"New value: +"Optional public URL of a reference image to edit/restyle instead of generating from scratch (png, jpeg, gif, webp; max 5 MB)"
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds valuable behavioral context: the model used (Gemini 2.5 Flash), output format (PNG, base64, raw bytes option), payment/auth via x402 ($0.07 per call), and capabilities (text rendering, reference image editing). No annotation contradiction.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It packs a lot of information efficiently, though a more structured format (e.g., bullet points) could improve scanability slightly. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 params, output schema exists), the description covers most key aspects: generation types, model, aspect ratios, reference images, payment auth. It does not detail the output schema (unnecessary due to its existence) or error cases, but overall provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 100% schema coverage, parameters are already well-described. The description adds extra meaning: explains common aspect ratios (1:1 default, 16:9, etc.), clarifies reference image usage with examples ('put this product on this beach'), and notes the max of 3 images. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 clearly states the verb ('generate image') and the resource ('AI IMAGE GENERATION — POST {prompt}'). It distinguishes from siblings by detailing capabilities like photoreal scenes, illustrations, product shots, UI mockups, and reference image editing, which sets it apart from other generation tools (e.g., post_logo_generate).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on when to use (e.g., for generating images from prompts, editing with references), but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives. It mentions the model and payment auth, which helps guide usage, but no direct 'use this instead of X' statements.

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

All webbersites-x402-data-api 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

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but the SEO-related tools (head_check, full_audit, site_audit, etc.) overlap in scope, potentially causing confusion despite clear descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

Tool names consistently follow a get_/post_/delete_ verb pattern with descriptive noun phrases (e.g., get_seo_head_check, post_store_collection), with no mixing of naming conventions.

Tool Count2/5

With 46 tools covering a wide breadth of domains (SEO, accessibility, music, crypto, linting, etc.), the count is excessive for a single server, feeling unfocused and heavy.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers most core operations for each sub-domain, but minor gaps exist (e.g., missing update for datastore, limited music operations).

Resources