Skip to main content
Glama

arrange_parts_on_plate

Pack multiple STL files onto a virtual build plate using bin-packing to maximize part density. Reports which parts fit, which overflow, and plate utilization.

Instructions

Pack multiple STL files onto a virtual build plate.

        Uses greedy bottom-left bin-packing (largest parts first) to
        efficiently arrange parts with configurable spacing. Reports
        which parts fit, which overflow, and plate utilization.

        Supports printing multiple copies of parts via the copies parameter.

        :param file_paths: JSON array of file paths, e.g. ``["/tmp/a.stl", "/tmp/b.stl"]``.
        :param plate_width_mm: Build plate width in mm (default 256).
        :param plate_depth_mm: Build plate depth in mm (default 256).
        :param spacing_mm: Minimum gap between parts in mm (default 5).
        :param copies: Optional JSON dict of filename->count, e.g. ``{"part.stl": 3}``.
        :param printer_id: Optional supported printer model id.  When
            provided, printer intelligence supplies the plate size.
        :returns: Dict with arranged_parts, overflow_parts, plate_utilization, summary.
        

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
copiesNo
file_pathsYes
printer_idNo
spacing_mmNo
plate_depth_mmNo
plate_width_mmNo
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the algorithm and output but does not state side effects (e.g., file modifications, permissions required). The tool appears to be a read-only arrangement, but this is not explicitly confirmed.

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?

The description is well-structured with a summary, algorithm explanation, and parameter list. It is informative but slightly verbose; however, the detail is justified given the lack of schema descriptions.

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?

The description covers all parameters, algorithm, and output keys. It lacks explanations of error handling (e.g., missing files) and prerequisites, but overall it provides sufficient context for a tool with no output schema and no annotations.

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 must compensate. It provides detailed parameter descriptions in a docstring format, including defaults, examples, and expected formats (e.g., JSON arrays for file_paths, dict for copies). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Pack multiple STL files onto a virtual build plate.' It specifies the verb 'pack' and the resource 'STL files onto a build plate,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'auto_arrange_parts_on_plate' by emphasizing configurable parameters.

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?

The description explains the algorithm and what the tool reports but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'auto_arrange_parts_on_plate.' It lacks guidance on context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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/codeofaxel/kiln'

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