PicoBerry MCP Server

download_asset

Export a completed 3D asset to GLB, FBX, or OBJ. Obtain a short-lived signed download URL; FBX and OBJ come as zip bundles including textures.

Instructions

Export a completed 3D asset and get a short-lived signed download URL. glb = a single self-contained file. fbx/obj download as a .zip bundle (model + textures; + Unity .meta files when texture_preset='unity') — unzip before importing. For Unity use fbx (there is no built-in glb importer).

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": {
      "asset_id": "<asset_id>"
    },
    "name": "download_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`name`	No
`format`	No	glb
`asset_id`	Yes
`texture_preset`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description discloses key behaviors: signed URL is short-lived, formats produce different outputs (single file vs. zip with textures), and Unity .meta inclusion. Does not mention rate limits or auth, but adequately warns about zip handling.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then efficiently covers format differences and Unity advice in two sentences. No redundancy or wordiness.

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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, description addresses key aspects: output (signed URL), format handling, and Unity consideration. Lacks details on asset_id sourcing or URL expiry but sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but description adds meaning for 'format' (glb single self-contained file, fbx/obj zip), 'texture_preset' (unity adds .meta files), and implies 'asset_id' identifies a completed asset. Does not explain 'name' parameter, but overall adds value beyond schema enums.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states 'Export a completed 3D asset and get a short-lived signed download URL', specifying verb (export/get), resource (3D asset), and outcome (URL). Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_asset (pure metadata) and generate tools (creation).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides context on when to use (completed assets) and format-specific advice (glb single file, fbx/obj as zip, Unity recommendation). Lacks explicit exclusion or alternative tool guidance but sufficiently directs correct usage.

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

Deploy Server