How to use this server: what the metadata means, the rules that are easy to get wrong (real-world metres, one material, never rescale to fake a fit), and worked recipes for building a scene. Call it when a tool did not behave as you expected, or before a multi-step build, instead of guessing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | No | omit for the overview |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the types of content and even names specific rules (real-world metres, one material, never rescale to fake a fit), giving useful behavioral context beyond what structured fields show.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and filled with concrete examples. Every clause earns its place, and the length is appropriate for the instructional content.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a help tool with a single optional parameter, the description fully covers what the tool returns and when to use it. The enum topics are self-explanatory, and no output schema is needed for help content.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with an enum for topic and a description 'omit for the overview'. The tool description itself does not add parameter details, but schema already documents the single optional parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states this is a help tool for using the server, with specific content: metadata meaning, easy-to-get-wrong rules, and worked recipes. It distinguishes itself from sibling lookup tools by being a meta-tool that explains server usage.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly says 'Call it when a tool did not behave as you expected, or before a multi-step build, instead of guessing.' This provides clear when-to-use guidance and states the alternative (guessing) to avoid.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct responsibility: searching the catalogue, inspecting a single asset, expanding into a compatible scene, managing kits, placing objects on terrain, generating variants, previewing scenes, checking ownership, and reporting gaps. Even the meta tools (get_help, report_need, who_am_i) are cleanly separated from the asset-workflow tools.
The naming is largely consistent snake_case with an action_noun shape: get_asset, get_kit, get_terrain, list_kits, search_assets, preview_scene. Minor deviations like find_matching and who_am_i still read clearly and do not create confusion.
Eleven tools is a well-scoped count for a 3D asset catalogue server that also handles scene composition, terrain, variants, previews, and account context. Each tool earns its place and none feel redundant or like filler.
The surface covers the full workflow from searching and inspecting assets, through variants and kits, to scene placement, terrain height queries, previews, and ownership checks. Meta tools for help and reporting gaps also close the loop, so an agent is unlikely to hit a dead end.
