Recraft V3 MCP guide for brand graphics

Use the configured Recraft V3 entry for brand-graphic concepts

For the narrow query “recraft v3 mcp,” the current OfflineCreator catalog lists Recraft V3 as a text-to-image entry, positions it for brand graphics, and charges 5 credits per submitted generation. That fit label makes it a reasonable candidate for posters, campaign motifs, editorial illustrations, and other design-forward compositions; it is product positioning, not evidence that the model will preserve a brand system or outperform another model.

For MCP, call `list_models` and pass the exact model ID returned by the connected Studio service. The public first-party pages retrieved for this draft verify the Recraft V3 name, workflow, fit, and cost but do not expose its exact Studio ID, so this page does not assert one. fal separately documents `fal-ai/recraft/v3/text-to-image` as its direct upstream endpoint. That endpoint is not evidence of Studio's internal mapping and must not be substituted for the live Studio model ID.

The published MCP 0.1.2 `generate` schema accepts only `16:9`, `9:16`, or `1:1` and describes `16:9` as its default. fal's direct Recraft endpoint exposes square plus portrait and landscape 4:3 and 16:9 presets, custom dimensions, styles, colors, and a custom style ID. Those upstream controls are broader than the current Studio MCP tool. Recraft separately prices documented V3 raster generation at $0.04 per image and V3 Vector at $0.08 per image; that upstream distinction does not promise Vector access through Studio MCP.

Studio model selection

Use the ID returned by `list_models`The exact current Studio ID was not exposed by the public first-party pages retrieved for this draft.

Current Studio cost

5 credits per generationA monthly-refresh product fact, not a quality score.

Upstream fal endpoint

`fal-ai/recraft/v3/text-to-image`Direct fal identifier only; it does not establish Studio's current internal mapping.

Evaluate composition before asking for finished copy

Treat the first run as a composition proof. Name the deliverable, focal subject, visual hierarchy, palette, texture, whitespace, and one frame ratio. A useful evaluation prompt is: “Square campaign concept for a neighborhood astronomy club; one oversized indigo moon above three small coral observatory shapes; cream paper texture; asymmetric editorial layout; large empty band across the bottom; no logos, no labels, no additional objects.” This is an authored test brief, not a reproduced model result.

The acceptance question is whether the output supplies a usable visual direction: recognizable hierarchy, enough clear space for live type, a palette that can be translated into approved brand tokens, and no accidental marks that resemble a logo. If the direction fails, change one variable rather than adding a list of contradictory adjectives. A second run might alter only the focal scale or only the palette. Record the prompt and review decision so any future test can be assessed against explicit criteria instead of memory.

This evaluation path deliberately differs from a general brand-graphic how-to. It asks whether this configured model belongs in the workflow at all. If the concept needs precise UI, a locked logo, exact packaging geometry, or a repeatable design system, generate only exploratory artwork and rebuild the production layout in a suitable design tool.

Treat exact typography as a downstream production step

Recraft's own guidance says quotation marks can help a model recognize literal wording, but it also states that Recraft V3 may distort or misspell very small text and that unsupported characters will not render. Generated lettering can therefore help judge how a headline mass, sign, or label participates in the composition, but it should not be treated as approved copy merely because it looks plausible at thumbnail size.

For exact campaign wording, request a clean composition with deliberate copy space, then add editable type after generation. Check spelling, punctuation, font licensing, contrast, line breaks, localization, and legal language in the downstream layout. If generated text must remain embedded for an artistic effect, enlarge it, quote the intended words, and inspect every character at delivery resolution. Reject extra words and near-miss glyphs rather than repairing them by assumption.

Recraft's native Studio and API offer text-layout and manual text controls that are not exposed by the reviewed OfflineCreator MCP `generate` schema. The distinction matters: a capability documented for Recraft's own interface does not automatically become an MCP parameter. This guide therefore recommends composition-first generation and post-production type instead of claiming exact text placement through the current OfflineCreator tool.

Concept use

Judge headline scale and visual balanceGenerated lettering may be useful as a compositional placeholder.

Production use

Replace with editable, reviewed typeVerify every character, line break, contrast choice, and required legal phrase.

Choose the next guide from the unresolved decision

Return to the parent model directory for the consolidated decision because this draft lacks both a publicly verified exact Studio model ID and a real, reproducible contact sheet. Use the version-freshness guide when the question is whether the configured V3 entry matches Recraft's newest public family. Use the typography evaluation guide when the creative direction depends on generated words and needs a repeatable inspection method.

Consolidate the evidence decision into the parent model hub

This standalone page cannot complete its evidence contract: current public first-party material does not expose the exact Studio model ID, and research produced no real contact sheet with reproducible prompts and settings. Consolidate both missing evidence classes into the parent MCP model guide hub rather than treating this page as a complete standalone evaluation.

This file remains a guidance-only, researched, unreviewed draft. It records the current catalog cost and fit, the narrower MCP control surface, the typography handoff, and the gaps that block standalone treatment. It makes no empirical output, quality, reliability, benchmark, or customer-outcome claim. Recraft's current documentation also lists V4 and V4.1 beyond V3, so the configured V3 entry and live MCP schema require monthly rechecking.