Skip to main content
Glama

lightprobe-generate-grid

Generate a 3D grid of light probes around Point, Spot, and Area lights, using density gradient: denser near lights, sparser at edges. Raycast finds ground; CheckSphere avoids interior probes. Use lightprobe-analyze for spacing.

Instructions

Generate Light Probes in a 3D grid within local light influence ranges. Supports density gradient: denser probes near light centers, sparser at edges. Scans Point/Spot/Area lights, skips Directional lights. Uses raycasting to find ground level and Physics.CheckSphere to avoid placing probes inside geometry. Use 'lightprobe-analyze' first to get recommended spacing values.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
spacingXZNoHorizontal spacing between probes. Default: 33
spacingYNoVertical spacing between probes. Default: 22
heightLevelsNoNumber of vertical layers of probes above ground.3
groundOffsetNoHeight offset from ground for the first probe layer.0.5
groupNameNoName of the LightProbeGroup GameObject to create.LightProbeGroup_Auto
insideCheckRadiusNoRadius for CheckSphere to reject probes inside geometry. Set to 0 to disable.0.300000012
useDensityGradientNoEnable density gradient: denser probes near light centers (d<0.4 range → half spacing), standard spacing at mid-range (0.4-0.8), sparser at edges (>0.8 → double spacing). When false, uses uniform spacingXZ everywhere.true
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden and covers key behaviors: density gradient logic, light type scanning (skipping directional), raycasting for ground level, and Physics.CheckSphere to avoid geometry. It explains the effect of the 'useDensityGradient' parameter in detail, though it doesn't mention potential performance impact or undo behavior.

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?

The description is four sentences, each contributing unique information. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and efficiently covers algorithm details, parameter behavior, and usage recommendation. No redundant or vague statements are present.

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 the complexity (7 params, no output schema), the description explains most aspects: the generation algorithm, density gradient, light scanning, and physics checks. However, it does not describe the output (e.g., what is returned or the created GameObject's properties) or error conditions. It references the analyze tool for spacing, which compensates slightly.

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?

All 7 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), and the description adds extra context, especially for 'useDensityGradient' (explaining the gradient stages) and 'insideCheckRadius' (mentioning it uses CheckSphere). This helps in understanding how parameters interact, surpassing the schema alone.

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?

The description clearly states the tool generates light probes in a 3D grid within light influence ranges, with specific details on density gradient and light type scanning. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'lightprobe-analyze' and 'lightprobe-bake' by focusing on grid generation and even references the analyze tool as a prerequisite.

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?

The description explicitly advises using 'lightprobe-analyze' first to get recommended spacing values, providing a clear usage sequence. While it doesn't list alternatives, the context of sibling tools (e.g., lightprobe-clear, lightprobe-configure-lights) makes the tool's role as the grid generator clear.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/butterlatte-zhang/unity-ai-bridge'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server