Polyfork low-poly 3D assets

get_terrain

AT WHAT HEIGHT DO I PLACE THIS, and where can I build. Every kit ships a procedural TERRAIN program for its own ground, and the ground is no longer flat, so a y of 0 is wrong almost everywhere. Pass at with the x/z you want to place at and you get the ground height there; set position.y to it. flat_areas are the level building sites: square footprints whose ground barely varies, largest first, none overlapping, with the height to place at. Use it before laying out a town, a farm or a depot, instead of guessing a y and hoping. Pass profile to get the ground along a proposed road or wall: heights, the grade between points, and whether each point is under water, so you know where a bridge is needed. Everything is in world coordinates, the same ones the module takes, so an answer can be used directly. Terrain from two different kits joins edge to edge on a shared 64m grid, so several kits can share one landscape.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`at`	No	x,z;x,z;… — AT WHAT HEIGHT DO I PLACE THIS. Returns the ground height and slope under each point; set the object's position.y to the y you get back and it rests on the terrain. Use this for anything that is not going on one of the level sites. Up to 64 points.
`id`	Yes	terrain asset id. Omit to list every kit that has one.
`span`	No	block size in 64m chunks, 1 to 4. Bigger blocks have more room and more sites.
`flats`	No	how many level sites to return (default 12, max 40)
`erosion`	No	0 to 1. Weathers the landforms: valleys smooth out, crests stay sharp. Changes where the level sites are, so ask with the same value you intend to build with.
`flatten`	No	0 to 1. Clears a level area in the MIDDLE of the block for a settlement, leaving the landscape around it. Raise it when the natural sites are too small for what you are placing.
`profile`	No	x0,z0,x1,z1[,steps] — the ground along a straight line, for a road, a wall or a bridge
`scatter`	No	n placement points the terrain picks itself, already on the ground and already filtered to slopes gentle enough to stand on, each with a random yaw. For rocks, trees and dressing.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that terrain is non-flat (y=0 is wrong), returns ground height and slope for `at`, flat building sites, profile details (heights, grade, underwater points), world-coordinate alignment, and how kits join on a 64m grid. This is rich, transparent behavior.

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 somewhat longer than necessary but front-loaded with the core question. Every sentence adds value (e.g., explaining world coordinates, grid joining), so it is not wasteful. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but structure is effective.

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 complex 8-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential workflow: height lookup, flat areas, profile querying, and coordinate system. It doesn't detail every parameter, but the schema already does. It also adds context for multi-kit terrain joining, making it quite complete for its complexity.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context for key parameters: it explains how `at` returns a height to set as position.y, and how `profile` returns grade and underwater status. It also clarifies the output concept of 'flat_areas' (though the schema parameter is `flats`), slightly enhancing the schema's field 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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: to determine the correct ground height for placement ('AT WHAT HEIGHT DO I PLACE THIS') and to identify buildable areas ('and where can I build'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like `get_asset` or `list_kits` by focusing on terrain-specific procedural generation and placement support.

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 usage guidance: use it before laying out a town, farm, or depot, and use `profile` for roads/walls. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context strongly implies this is the dedicated tool for terrain queries.

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

All Polyfork low-poly 3D assets tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct workflow: catalogue search, single-asset detail, kit listing/detail, variant generation, scene matching, terrain placement, preview, ownership, help, and feedback. Even the retrieval-heavy tools are separated by clear operation and output. An agent should be able to pick the right tool from descriptions alone.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names are snake_case action phrases with consistent get_, list_, search_, find_, preview_, and report_ conventions. Retrieval tools uniformly start with get_ or list_, and the exceptions still follow a predictable action-first structure. There is no mixed casing or synonym soup.

Tool Count5/5

At 11 tools the surface is well-scoped for a 3D asset catalogue and scene-building server. Each tool covers a distinct capability and none feels redundant or decorative. This is comfortably within the ideal range for a focused server.

Completeness5/5

The server covers the full discovery-to-scene workflow: search, inspect, kit composition, variant remixing, terrain placement, scene preview, and ownership checks. Missing catalogue entries and rough edges are explicitly handled by report_need, and get_help covers misuse, so there are no dead ends. No obvious domain operations appear absent for this server's stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?