Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-for-cascadeur

mcp-for-cascadeur

by Rickcy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

pose_snapshot

Destructive

Captures selected-object poses in the current session and optionally saves them to workspace JSON for reuse or comparison; it does not preserve whole-scene animation or curves.

Instructions

Capture a selected-object pose in this host session, optionally to workspace JSON. This does not preserve whole-scene animation or curves.

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": {
      "objects": "<objects>"
    },
    "name": "pose_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathNo
frameNo
spaceNoglobal
objectsYes
overwriteNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the important scope limitation that whole-scene animation and curves are not preserved, but it does not explain the destructive aspect—what may be overwritten when writing workspace JSON or how session snapshots are released.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and followed by a limitation. There is no wasted wording.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a five-parameter, destructive-flagged tool with no output schema, the definition is too sparse. It covers purpose and one caveat but omits snapshot lifecycle, return identity, overwrite behavior, and parameter meanings.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage across five parameters, the description should carry parameter meaning. It only hints at objects ('selected-object') and path ('workspace JSON'); frame, space, and overwrite are entirely unexplained.

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 gives a specific verb ('Capture') and a specific resource ('selected-object pose') plus scope ('in this host session'), and it rules out whole-scene animation and curves. It stops short of naming a sibling such as pose_read or character_pose_snapshot, so sibling differentiation is clear but not explicit.

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?

It implies use for snapshotting selected-object poses and gives one exclusion: whole-scene animation or curves are not preserved. It does not state when to prefer pose_read, character_pose_snapshot, subtree_snapshot, or pose_restore, nor any prerequisites.

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