A
licenseA
qualityA
maintenanceEnables AI assistants to control Blender via MCP tools for scene manipulation, material assignment, rendering, and Python script execution.
27
336 PyPI
28
MIT
prompt-to-scene
by 316sandon12
Related Servers
Alternatives to prompt-to-scene
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseCqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to build game assets in Blender by modeling, lighting, rendering previews to inspect and correct, validating against engine budgets, and exporting to GLB/FBX.126MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to control a Blender instance through MCP tools, supporting scene creation, editing, and asset exchange via HTTP and background CLI processes.26Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI clients to control a running Blender instance through the Model Context Protocol, allowing scene inspection, object creation and editing, rendering, and execution of Blender Python. It works locally via a WebSocket bridge between the MCP server and a Blender add-on.15MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI to control Blender 3D through the Model Context Protocol, allowing Python execution, scene state queries, and automation of 3D workflows.5GPL 3.0
- FlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables controlling a local Blender instance through natural language or code, allowing arbitrary Python/bpy execution and querying scene or object information via MCP.4-
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Scored across 4 tools
Disambiguation3/5
inspect_target and get_asset_status both surface receipt/status information, creating overlap in when to use each. build_asset and publish_blend also share queued/result semantics and Unity import behavior, though descriptions distinguish from-scratch building versus publishing an existing .blend.
Naming Consistency5/5
All four tools use a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern: inspect_target, build_asset, publish_blend, get_asset_status. The verb choices are all imperative and predictable for a pipeline-oriented server.
Tool Count4/5
Four tools is reasonable for a v0.1 asset pipeline: inspect, build, publish, and check status. It is slightly lean for full lifecycle management but each tool has a plausible role.
Completeness3/5
Core build, publish, and status operations exist, but the surface lacks explicit delete/list asset operations and has no direct prompt-to-scene generation tool despite the server name. Update is only partially addressed through stable asset_id reuse.
Maintenance
ActivityNo data
ResponsivenessNo issues