ply 3D Printing

Show a model's link with an upload box

price_model_link

Read-onlyIdempotent

Show a 3D model's page in ply's card with an upload box: the customer opens the link, downloads the file (STL, 3MF, STEP or OBJ) and drops it in for an instant price. ply doesn't download models from any site itself.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	The model's page
`color`	No	Color name, e.g. black, white, red (default black)
`title`	No	The model's name
`units`	No	Units of an STL/OBJ file, which doesn't say (default mm). Use in if the part comes out 25x too small.
`coating`	No	Resin only: coating (needs sanding)
`process`	No	fdm = plastic (default); resin = fine detail (miniatures, figurines, smooth looks)
`sanding`	No	Resin only: sanded finish
`material`	No	Material name or id, e.g. PLA, PETG, ASA, TPU (default PLA).
`quantity`	No	How many (default 1)
`strength`	No	Plastic parts only. Default balanced; strong for parts under load

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedNov 1, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / file

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Which file to print, by name, when the model has several",
-  "type": "string"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / sizeMm

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Poly Haven only: the printed size of the longest side, mm (up to 250)",
-  "type": "number"
-}

changedInput schema / properties / title / description

Previous value: -"The model's name (for links to sites ply doesn't fetch from)"New value: +"The model's name"

First observedOct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower; the description still contributes valuable context by stating ply never downloads models from arbitrary sites and that the customer must fetch and upload the file themselves. It also lists supported formats (STL, 3MF, STEP, OBJ), which is behaviorally relevant.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the core action stated first and the important 'ply doesn't download models' caveat second. The first sentence is dense and slightly awkward in phrasing, but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description should say what the caller gets back (a card, a URL, a rendered link) but never does. It also leaves unexplained how the many pricing parameters interact with the customer-upload flow. Adequate but with a real gap given the tool's complexity.

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% with four documented enums, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description only adds the accepted file formats relevant to the eventual upload; it does not explain how options like process, material, quantity or strength drive the resulting quote.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The verb 'Show' plus the resource 'a 3D model's page in ply's card with an upload box' gives a clear action and outcome: it renders a shareable card/link rather than performing pricing itself. It does not name or distinguish itself from the obvious sibling 'price_file', leaving the agent to infer the split.

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?

Usage is only implied through the described customer flow (open link, download file, drop it in for an instant price). There is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance, no exclusion, and no mention of when to prefer price_file or make_part instead.

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

All ply 3D Printing tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?