Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to Ceratops-Blender-MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • A
      license
      B
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to drive native CAD and 3D applications—Autodesk Fusion, Blender, and Unreal Engine—by planning work, executing trusted Python, inspecting real geometry, revising editable source files, and handing assets between applications. Each job keeps durable state, revision checks, and artifact hashes, with role-based handoffs for planning, modeling, geometry QA, interchange, and review.
      9
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-compatible clients to control Blender for modeling, materials, animation, physics, rendering, scene inspection, documentation search, and asset/generation service integration. It exposes a stdio endpoint with many Blender operations for creating and editing 3D content.
      AGPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables secure, local automation of Blender through typed MCP tools for scene, modeling, material, animation, rendering, and file workflows via an authenticated loopback bridge.
      173
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables local Blender-based product modeling and photography by exposing project management, scene editing, rendering, image inspection, and asset publishing tools to MCP hosts like Claude Code, with versioned .blend revisions and PNG renders.
      GPL 3.0
    • A
      license
      C
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables MCP-capable assistants to inspect, create, measure, and review Blender production workflows for characters, rigs, animation, game meshes, facial performance, secondary motion, and PBR materials with checkpoints and visual QA.
      274
      MIT

    TDQS

    C2.9/5.0

    Scored across 30 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Most tools have distinct purposes, but render_character_review, render_shot_preview, and render_shot_final could be confused despite different targets and gates. Creation tools (create_character, create_shot, setup_camera, etc.) are clearly differentiated by noun. Some overlap exists but descriptions help.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern, with verbs like create, inspect, list, compare, promote, archive, package, render, validate, get, cancel, resume. No mixed conventions or vague names.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 30 tools, the set is large and may overwhelm an agent or indicate over-specialization. While each tool has a clear purpose, the count feels heavy for a typical MCP server, and some tools could potentially be merged (e.g., render_* into a parameterized render tool).

    Completeness5/5

    The tool surface covers a comprehensive production lifecycle from creation, inspection, validation, promotion, packaging, rendering, to job management (status, cancel, resume). No obvious CRUD or lifecycle gaps for the domain of character and shot production.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues