Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

estimate_support_material

Read-only

Estimate support material volume and weight for a mesh or CAD file by analyzing overhang triangles projected to the build plate.

Instructions

Estimate support material needed for a mesh.

        Analyzes overhang triangles and projects them to the build plate
        to estimate the volume and weight of support material required.

        :param file_path: Path to a mesh (.stl, .obj, .glb, .3mf) or a CAD
            file (.step, .stp), which is converted automatically.
        :returns: Dict with support volume (mm³), weight (g), and overhang stats.

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": "estimate_support_material"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_pathYesPath to a mesh (.stl, .obj, .glb, .3mf) or a CAD file (.step, .stp), which is converted automatically.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / file_path / description
      Added value: +"Path to a mesh (.stl, .obj, .glb, .3mf) or a CAD file (.step, .stp), which is converted automatically."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes the analytical method (overhang projection) and confirms the operation is a pure analysis, but it does not state file-size limits, whether the CAD conversion is lossy, or what material density assumption underlies the gram weight.

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 the method, then param and return notes — a sensible order with no filler. The Sphinx-style ':param'/':returns' markup is slightly boilerplate but the returns line earns its place because no output schema exists.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter read-only analysis tool, the description covers purpose, method, accepted formats, and return payload, which is reasonably complete absent an output schema. The notable gap is the weight estimate: grams depend on an undisclosed material/density assumption, and no overhang-angle threshold is mentioned even though 'overhang stats' is returned.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single file_path parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description's :param line repeats the schema text verbatim, adding no new meaning (e.g., whether paths are server-side or uploaded, relative vs absolute), so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Estimate support material needed for a mesh') and explains the mechanism — projecting overhang triangles to the build plate to compute volume and weight. This is far more specific than tautology, but it never distinguishes itself from close siblings such as estimate_supports, plan_supports, or analyze_printability, which an agent could easily confuse it with.

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?

Usage is only implied by the purpose: an agent can infer it is for pre-print support estimation, but the description names no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives despite a crowded sibling space (estimate_supports, plan_supports, check_step_support, estimate_print_cost_from_mesh). No when-not guidance is 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