Skip to main content
Glama
asedias

bl-mcp

by asedias
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

render_view

Read-only

Renders a close-up image of any target in the scene from a chosen angle and mode for visual checking of geometry, normals, or topology.

Instructions

Close-up picture for checking: one free angle with its own camera and light, no set-up needed. The camera frames the bounding volume of target (with children; empty means everything), so a tall figure and a small bolt both fill the picture. Azimuth 0 looks at the front (from -Y), 90 from +X, 180 from the back; elevation 0 is level, 90 is from above. fov 0 means orthographic. isolate=false draws the whole scene but still frames target: use it for close-ups of joints in context. Modes: solid (studio light, material colours), clay (one grey, shows form only), xray (see-through), flat (material colours without light), wire (edges: topology, hidden parts; lines are about 2 pixels wide at the centre of the frame at any zoom), ids (one flat colour per object, with a legend), normals (world normal as colour), backfaces (red where you see the inside of a face: flipped normals, open shells). eye puts the camera at a world point looking at look_at with fov (no framing): a player's view from a spawn at eye height, a look through a doorway. Use render_sheet for the overview with a metre grid, render_final for the scene lights, materials and camera.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eyeNo
fovNo
modeNosolid
nameNoview
sizeNo
marginNo
targetNo
azimuthNo
isolateNo
look_atNo
elevationNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / eye
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "number"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null
+}
  2. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds rich behavioral detail beyond that: what each of the eight modes actually shows, that isolate=false still frames target, that wire lines are ~2px wide at any zoom, and that empty target means everything. It does not say what the render produces or where the image lands, which is the one remaining opaque trait.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the purpose in the first clause and then earns most of its length with camera math and mode semantics that are not in any structured field. It is dense, however: the mode list is a long parenthetical run-on, and the eye explanation is wedged mid-paragraph rather than given its own lead-in.

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 an 11-parameter rendering tool with zero schema descriptions and no output schema, the description supplies the camera geometry, framing behavior and mode semantics an agent needs to call it correctly. It omits the output story (file naming via `name`, what size/margin control, what is returned), which is a real gap given there is no output schema to lean on.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden and nearly does: azimuth/elevation are given explicit reference frames, fov=0 explained as orthographic, target explained as a bounding volume that includes children and empty=everything, isolate explained, eye explained as a world point looking at look_at with no framing, and every mode enum value is described. Only name, size and margin are left implicit.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Close-up picture for checking') with scope, and explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings: 'Use render_sheet for the overview with a metre grid, render_final for the scene lights, materials and camera.' An agent can route to it without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Names the two alternative render tools and the exact condition that selects each, plus concrete use-contexts for isolate ('use it for close-ups of joints in context') and for eye mode ('a player's view from a spawn, a look through a doorway'). When/when-not/alternatives are all present.

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