Skip to main content
Glama

Cut a model that does not fit the bed

split_for_printing
Destructive

Cut one body in a project into two halves at a plane, with a joint so they go back together after printing. This is the answer to "my model is too big for my printer". Both halves stay fully parametric — each is the original body intersected with a half-space, not a flattened mesh — so they still export as solids and still open for editing. Pick the joint by what the print needs: dowel puts a socket in BOTH halves and prints the pin separately, so neither half has anything standing off its cut face and a wrong fit costs a two-gram reprint instead of a whole half; pin and tenon grow the key out of one half; bolt is the only one that comes apart again. Omit position to cut through the middle of the body on that axis.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fitNoHow much slack the key gets in its socket. Defaults to normal (0.4 mm total). Use `custom` with `gap` to set it yourself.
gapNoTOTAL clearance across the key in mm when `fit` is custom, as a fit coupon reads it (each side gets half). Default 0.4.
axisNoWhich way the plane faces. Cut a tall part across z, a long one across x. Defaults to z.
sizeNoKey size in mm — pin/dowel diameter, tenon width, bolt size. Defaults to 5.
countNoHow many keys across the cut face (1-6). Defaults to 2.
depthNoHow far a key reaches into the far half, mm. For a dowel, into EACH half. Defaults to 6.
jointNoDefaults to pin.
shapeNoKey cross-section (pin and dowel only). Round lets the halves spin about a single key; any other shape stops that. Defaults to circle.
styleNoStraight or tapered (pin and dowel only). Tapered is easier to start and shrinks the flat bridge over a blind socket. Defaults to prism.
nodeIdYesThe top-level body to cut, from `get_project`. A nested node, a generator or a component instance cannot be cut — the cut is authored in world coordinates.
versionNoThe `version` get_project reported, so a concurrent change is detected rather than overwritten.
positionNoWhere the plane sits along `axis`, in world mm. Must pass THROUGH the body — the reply names the legal range if it does not. Omit to cut at the middle, which is almost always what you want.
projectIdYesThe project containing the body to cut.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / fit / description
      Previous value: -"How much slack the key gets in its socket. Defaults to normal (0.2 mm). Use `custom` with `gap` to set it yourself."New value: +"How much slack the key gets in its socket. Defaults to normal (0.4 mm total). Use `custom` with `gap` to set it yourself."
    • changedInput schema / properties / gap / description
      Previous value: -"The clearance in mm when `fit` is custom."New value: +"TOTAL clearance across the key in mm when `fit` is custom, as a fit coupon reads it (each side gets half). Default 0.4."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Added value: +"The project containing the body to cut."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces that cutting produces two parametric halves that remain editable and export as solids, plus the reassembly behavior of each joint. It never explicitly states that the original single body is consumed/replaced, which is the one destructive consequence left implicit.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then layered with joint-selection rationale where it matters. Dense but every sentence carries decision-relevant content; slightly long for a single paragraph but no obvious filler.

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?

For a 13-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the key decisions (joint choice, position omission, parametric preservation) that the schema's terse field docs do not. Remaining gaps are minor: what happens to the source body and how the two resulting halves are referenced afterward.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the bar is baseline 3, but the description genuinely enriches the joint enum — explaining that dowel sockets BOTH halves and prints the pin separately, pin/tenon grow the key from one half, and bolt is the only reversible option. It also ties position omission to cutting through the middle, adding meaning beyond the schema text.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Cut one body in a project into two halves at a plane') plus the outcome (a joint so they reassemble), and frames the exact use case ('my model is too big for my printer'). An agent can distinguish this from edit_nodes or repair_project without opening a schema.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context (model too big for the bed) and detailed selection guidance for the joint parameter, including tradeoffs like dowel costing a two-gram reprint vs. a whole half. It does not name a sibling alternative or state explicit exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources