Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
tripo-studio-mcp

tripo-studio-mcp

by Neko-Yukari
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

tripo_upscale

Upscale an existing textured 3D project to 4K or 8K, selecting detailed or extreme quality to raise texture resolution.

Instructions

纹理放大到 4K / 8K，对应内部接口 operation/texture_upscaler。项目必须已有贴图。

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "tripo_upscale"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
project_idYes
wait_secondsNo默认 480 秒
model_versionNo默认 v3.0-20250812（界面所用）
texture_qualityNodetailed = 4K，extreme = 8K（默认；消耗 8K 试用次数或更高套餐）。目标必须高于当前贴图：H3.1 默认生成已是 4K，再要 detailed 会报 500

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the prerequisite that the project already have textures and points at the internal operation, but says nothing about the long-running async nature implied by wait_seconds, credit consumption, or failure behavior (the schema, not the description, mentions the 500 error case).

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The internal operation-name clause is arguably implementation noise for an agent, which keeps it from a 5.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 4-parameter mutation job with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key precondition but omits the async/wait semantics, cost implications, and what the agent gets back or should poll (tripo_status) after submitting.

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 75% and the texture_quality enum is documented in detail in the schema, including the 4K/8K mapping and the H3.1 constraint. The description only echoes the 4K/8K targets and adds no syntax or defaults beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource (纹理放大 = upscale texture) plus the target outputs (4K/8K), and maps to the internal operation name. It is clearly distinct from tripo_texture (generate) and tripo_pbr, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

The precondition '项目必须已有贴图' tells the agent one gate for calling it, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over tripo_texture, tripo_pbr, or tripo_remesh, and no statement about what to do when the precondition fails.

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