Kiln

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

analyze_structural_risks

Read-only

Analyze an STL mesh for structural weak points and return risk locations with severity, helping agents find where a design may fail under load before printing.

Instructions

Analyze an STL mesh for structural weak points.

        Goes beyond printability to find **structural** risks:
        - **thin_neck**: narrow cross-sections that will snap under load
        - **stress_concentration**: abrupt section changes that focus stress
        - **cantilever**: unsupported overhanging geometry
        - **sharp_corner**: sharp inside (concave) corners, where cracks start;
          outside edges never count
        - **insufficient_base**: topple risk from height-to-base ratio
        - **weak_layer_adhesion**: overhangs in structurally critical areas

        Returns risk locations as (x, y, z) coordinates in mm so agents
        can reason about *where* problems are, not just *that* they exist.

        A file smaller than anything a printer makes (a scene exported
        in metres) is answered with ``units_question`` and no risk: the
        counts are ``None`` until its size is settled.

        :param file_path: Path to the STL file.
        :param min_cross_section_mm2: Minimum safe cross-section area.
            Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold.
        :param sharp_angle_threshold_deg: How far the surface must turn inward
            across an edge, in degrees, for an inside corner to count as
            sharp.  Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold, the same for
            every caller.
        :returns: Dict with ``risks`` list, each containing location, severity, and description.

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": "analyze_structural_risks"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`file_path`	Yes	Path to the STL file.
`min_cross_section_mm2`	No	Minimum safe cross-section area. Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold.
`sharp_angle_threshold_deg`	No	How far the surface must turn inward across an edge, in degrees, for an inside corner to count as sharp. Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold, the same for every caller.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv1.5.1Nov 5, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / file_path / description
```
Added value: +"Path to the STL file."
```

addedInput schema / properties / min_cross_section_mm2 / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / min_cross_section_mm2 / description

Previous value: -"Default: 4.0."New value: +"Minimum safe cross-section area. Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold."

removedInput schema / properties / min_cross_section_mm2 / type
```
Removed value: -"number"
```

addedInput schema / properties / sharp_angle_threshold_deg / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedInput schema / properties / sharp_angle_threshold_deg / description

Previous value: -"Default: 60.0."New value: +"How far the surface must turn inward across an edge, in degrees, for an inside corner to count as sharp.  Leave unset for Kiln's own threshold, the same for every caller."

removedInput schema / properties / sharp_angle_threshold_deg / type
```
Removed value: -"number"
```

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.5.0Oct 23, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / min_cross_section_mm2 / default
```
Removed value: -4
```
- addedInput schema / properties / min_cross_section_mm2 / description
```
Added value: +"Default: 4.0."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / sharp_angle_threshold_deg / default
```
Removed value: -60
```
- addedInput schema / properties / sharp_angle_threshold_deg / description
```
Added value: +"Default: 60.0."
```
First observedv0.1.0Jul 4, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds substantial value beyond that by enumerating the exact risk classes detected (including the non-obvious 'outside edges never count' rule) and explaining that results are located in mm coordinates. It also discloses a notable edge case: an undersized file yields a `units_question` response with None counts, which is behavior an agent could not infer from annotations alone.

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-loaded with the purpose, then a scannable bullet list of risk types, then edge-case behavior, then params. Every section is useful, though the Sphinx-style ':param'/':returns' lines largely restate the schema descriptions, adding a little redundancy to an otherwise efficient layout.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a three-parameter read-only analysis tool with no output schema, the description covers what is analyzed, the categories produced, the shape of the return (risk list with location/severity/description), and the degenerate units_question case. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the response 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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds interpretive meaning: it clarifies that unset thresholds fall back to 'Kiln's own threshold, the same for every caller' (i.e., a shared default, not per-call randomness) and explains that sharpness is measured as inward surface turn across an edge. This goes mildly beyond the schema's wording rather than merely repeating it.

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 and resource ('Analyze an STL mesh for structural weak points') and explicitly distinguishes itself from the printability sibling ('Goes beyond printability to find structural risks'). An agent can tell this apart from analyze_printability, analyze_mesh_geometry, and assess_load_bearing without opening a schema.

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 contrast with printability gives clear context for when this tool is the right choice, and the enumerated risk categories imply the use case (structural safety before printing/loading). It stops short of naming alternatives like assess_load_bearing or stating exclusions (e.g., 'do not use for printability-only checks'), so it is clear guidance without explicit routing.

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

Deploy Server