Skip to main content
Glama
HoldMyBeer-gg

blend-ai

by HoldMyBeer-gg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

grid_fill

Fill a closed edge loop with a grid of quads to maintain clean topology between edge loops in Blender.

Instructions

Fill a closed edge loop with a grid of quads.

Creates a clean quad grid between edge loops. Better than fill_faces for maintaining good topology.

Args: object_name: Name of the mesh object. span: Number of grid columns. Range: 1-1000. offset: Offset for the grid alignment. Range: 0-1000.

selection: "ALL" to act on the whole mesh, or "CURRENT" to act only
    on what is already selected. Use the select_* tools to choose
    first. Defaults to "ALL".

Returns: Confirmation dict.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spanNo
offsetNo
selectionNoALL
object_nameYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.7.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • addedInput schema / properties / selection
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "ALL",
+  "enum": [
+    "ALL",
+    "CURRENT"
+  ],
+  "title": "Selection",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv1.2.2

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It gives useful behavioral context about topology quality, the selection scope, and defaults, but it does not state whether the operation requires edit mode, whether it is destructive or reversible, or what the confirmation contains beyond the output schema. This is adequate but leaves important operational gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with purpose, then structured into Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds useful information, including ranges and selection guidance, without unnecessary repetition.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the Returns line is supplementary rather than essential. The description covers parameters and selection behavior well, but for a mesh-editing operation with no annotations, it could more explicitly state prerequisites like edit mode or active object requirements.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description defines all four parameters: object_name, span (as number of grid columns with range), offset (grid alignment with range), and selection (enum meaning, when to use each mode, and default). It fully compensates for the empty schema 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Fill a closed edge loop with a grid of quads') and immediately distinguishes it from a named sibling by saying it is better than fill_faces for maintaining good topology. An agent can identify exactly what this tool does and when it is preferable.

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?

It names an alternative (fill_faces) and gives the condition for choosing this tool ('Better than fill_faces for maintaining good topology'). It also tells the agent to use select_* tools first and explains the selection default, but it does not state explicit exclusions or prerequisites such as required edit mode.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools