Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fatia MCP

Fatia MCP

by anthonydaros
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

extract_3mf_objects

Extract printable build items from a 3MF plate into separate STL files in millimetres, preserving applied world transforms for downstream slicing or review.

Instructions

Extract printable build items from one 3MF plate as new STL files in millimetres. Preserves applied world transforms. Indices are zero-based among all build items, including excluded items. STL loses paint, materials, modifiers and slicing settings.

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": {
      "file_path": "<file_path>"
    },
    "name": "extract_3mf_objects"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_pathYesSource 3MF path; never overwritten.
plate_indexNoZero-based source plate; default is the first plate.
item_indicesNoPrintable build-item indices on the selected plate. Omit for all printable items.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.47

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it discloses unit handling (millimetres), that world transforms are preserved, and the lossiness of the conversion (paint, materials, modifiers, slicing settings are dropped). The notable gap is that it never says where the new STL files are written or how they are named, which matters for a file-creating tool.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying a distinct fact: what it produces, transform fidelity, index semantics, and data loss. The most decision-relevant information (output format and units) is front-loaded with no filler.

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?

For a no-annotation, no-output-schema conversion tool it covers the essentials: units, transform preservation, lossiness, and index space. What remains missing is the output destination/naming convention for the created STL files, which the agent cannot learn from the schema since there is no output-path parameter.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a genuinely non-obvious fact: indices are zero-based across all build items including excluded ones, which clarifies the index space the schema leaves ambiguous ('printable build-item indices'). It does not restate the omit-for-all behaviour or the plate default, but those are already in the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb (extract), a specific resource (printable build items from one 3MF plate), and the output artifact (new STL files in millimetres). The conversion framing makes it hard to confuse with siblings like list_3mf_plate_objects, but the description never names an alternative or explicitly scopes itself against them.

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?

Usage is only implied by the operation itself: the agent can infer 'use this when you want STL files out of a plate'. There is no statement of when to prefer list_3mf_plate_objects (inspect without extracting) or open_in_slicer, and no prerequisites such as whether the 3MF must be a valid project file.

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