3dpacking-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| THREEDPACKING_API_KEY | No | Your API key. Falls back to the shared demo account. | |
| THREEDPACKING_ENDPOINT | No | Override the endpoint — staging, self-hosted, or a stub. | |
| THREEDPACKING_USERNAME | No | The account the key belongs to. Required with the key. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| pack_shipmentA | Work out how a shipment fits into shipping containers, trucks or pallets, using a real 3D bin-packing solver. Describe the cargo in plain English -- quantities, dimensions, weights, and any constraints such as fragile, non-tiltable, max stack height or a preferred container type -- and get back which containers are needed, how full each one is, anything that did not fit, and a link to an interactive 3D load plan. Use this instead of estimating from volume. Volume arithmetic ignores stacking rules, orientation and weight limits, and overstates what fits by a wide margin on real cargo. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion or overlap. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined in its description.
The tool name 'pack_shipment' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, which is a good convention. However, with only one tool, there is no broader pattern to assess for consistency.
A single tool for a domain like 3D packing feels thin, as users might expect additional capabilities such as container management or multi-shipment optimization. The count is at the low end of the borderline range.
The tool covers the core packing operation comprehensively, but the server lacks auxiliary tools for activities like validating container specifications or comparing alternative packing strategies. This leaves some gaps in the overall workflow.