Count SketchUp model entities across instance paths, materials, tags, and scenes; use max_entities to bound results.
Count entities through instance paths, materials, tags and scenes. Results are bounded by max_entities.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| model_id | No | ||
| active_path | No | ||
| max_entities | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.1Input schema / additionalPropertiesAdded value: +falseInput schema / properties / active_pathAdded value: +{
+ "items": {
+ "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+ "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+ "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "maxItems": 32,
+ "type": "array"
+}Input schema / properties / max_entitiesAdded value: +{
+ "default": 100000,
+ "maximum": 1000000,
+ "minimum": 1000,
+ "type": "integer"
+}Input schema / properties / model_idAdded value: +{
+ "minLength": 1,
+ "type": "string"
+}v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact beyond that — results are truncated at max_entities — but does not say what happens when the bound is hit, whether counts are approximate, or what the response looks like.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and free of padding. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence is a terse fragment that could have carried more of the missing parameter detail at the same length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema, 0% schema description coverage, and three undocumented parameters, the description leaves core questions unanswered: what the returned counts look like, how they are grouped, and what model_id and active_path select. For an aggregation tool this is substantially under-specified.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry all three parameters, yet only max_entities is referenced and even then only as a bounding limit with no mention of its default of 100000 or its 1000–1000000 range. model_id and active_path are entirely unexplained — notably active_path, whose array-of-positive-integers structure has no obvious meaning without prose.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a concrete verb and resource ("Count entities") and names the dimensions counted over (instance paths, materials, tags, scenes), so the agent knows this is a read-only aggregation tool rather than a mutation. However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like entity_list or model_get_info, which also enumerate entities.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no statement of when to reach for model_stats versus entity_list, entity_inspect, or model_get_info, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. The agent must infer usage purely from the name and verb.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.