Skip to main content
Glama

wearable_fit

Fits clothing or hair already in a Daz Studio scene to a specified figure, or unfits items when no figure is provided. Use it to attach or detach wearables correctly.

Instructions

Fits clothing or hair already in the scene to a figure (Daz "Fit To"), or unfits it.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "item": "<item>"
    },
    "name": "wearable_fit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemYesClothing or hair label.
figureNoFigure to fit it to; omit to unfit it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare it as a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation, so the description only needs to add context. It adds that the item must already exist in the scene and that omitting the figure reverses the fit, but says nothing about what happens to a prior fit, whether the operation is undoable, or what failure looks like when the item is absent.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first, the Daz terminology as a compact parenthetical, and no wasted clauses. Nothing is buried or redundant.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description covers the core operation and its inverse. A mild gap remains around error conditions and the effect on existing fits, but nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including 'omit to unfit it'. The description adds the useful constraint that the item must already be in the scene, but otherwise repeats schema-level semantics without adding format or edge-case meaning.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource: fit (or unfit) clothing/hair already in the scene to a figure, with the Daz "Fit To" term mapping it to the host application. It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling 'fit_check' or 'wearable_adjust', leaving the agent to infer which one applies.

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: 'already in the scene' hints at a prerequisite and 'or unfits it' signals the inverse operation, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to the sibling tools that overlap with it.

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