Skip to main content
Glama
codeofaxel

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python

estimate_material_cost

Estimate filament weight, length, and cost for printing a mesh using volume, infill percentage, wall layers, and material density. Supports PLA, PETG, ABS, TPU, ASA, Nylon, PC, PLA+, carbon fiber PLA.

Instructions

Estimate material usage and cost for printing a mesh.

        Computes filament weight, length, and cost based on mesh volume,
        infill percentage, wall shell count, and material density.

        **See also:** ``estimate_print_cost_from_mesh`` for a richer
        estimate that includes support material, adhesion, and electricity.

        Supported materials: pla, petg, abs, tpu, asa, nylon, pc, pla+,
        carbon_fiber_pla.

        :param file_path: Path to mesh file (.stl, .obj, or .glb).
        :param material: Material type (default "pla").
        :param infill_pct: Interior fill percentage 0-100 (default 20).
        :param wall_layers: Number of perimeter shells (default 3).
        :param cost_per_kg: Override material cost in $/kg (0 = use default).
        :returns: Dict with weight, filament length, and cost.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
materialNopla
file_pathYes
infill_pctNo
cost_per_kgNo
wall_layersNo

Tool Definition Quality

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the computation logic (volume-based, infill, etc.) but does not disclose side effects (e.g., file read-only), permissions, or latency. Adds some behavioral context but insufficient for a full transparency profile.

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 front-loaded with purpose and structure, including a computation summary, see-also, material list, and parameter definitions. While the parameter list adds length, it is necessary given missing schema descriptions. No redundant content, but could be slightly more concise.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description clearly states the return type (dict with weight, length, cost). It covers inputs, supported materials, and provides a comparison alternative. For a simple estimation tool, it is fully complete and leaves no major gaps.

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 compensates fully. It provides clear explanations for all 5 parameters (e.g., 'Infill percentage 0-100', 'Number of perimeter shells'), adding meaning far beyond the schema titles. Essential for correct parameter usage.

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 estimates material usage and cost for printing a mesh. It specifies the computation (filament weight, length, cost) and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'estimate_print_cost_from_mesh' via the 'See also' note, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

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 provides a 'See also' reference to a richer alternative, guiding when to use this tool vs. the sibling. It implies basic material-only estimation but does not explicitly state when not to use or list prerequisites. Clear context but lacks explicit exclusions.

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