Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

split_mesh_by_component

Separates disconnected bodies in a multi-component STL mesh into individual STL files using shared-edge analysis, making each component available for editing, inspection, or printing.

Instructions

Split a multi-component mesh into separate STL files.

        Identifies disconnected bodies (components) using shared-edge
        analysis and writes each as a separate file.

        :param file_path: Path to mesh file (.stl).
        :param output_dir: Directory for output files. Defaults to input directory.
        :returns: Dict with component count and file paths.

INLINE 3D STAGE: on success this tool opens Kiln's interactive 3D stage — an inline viewer panel the user can orbit, zoom, and turn over — in hosts that render MCP Apps panels (Kiln's hosted connection attaches a browser stage link for hosts that don't). Oversized meshes are decimated automatically for the stage; the PNG preview is the floor, not the whole experience.

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": "split_mesh_by_component"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_pathYesPath to mesh file (.stl).
output_dirNoDirectory for output files. Defaults to input directory. Default: "".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / file_path / description
      Added value: +"Path to mesh file (.stl)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / output_dir / description
      Previous value: -"Default: \"\"."New value: +"Directory for output files. Defaults to input directory. Default: \"\"."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.0
    • removedInput schema / properties / output_dir / default
      Removed value: -""
    • addedInput schema / properties / output_dir / description
      Added value: +"Default: \"\"."
  3. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: shared-edge detection, one output file per component, a return dict containing component count and file paths, automatic opening of the interactive 3D stage on success, and automatic decimation for oversized meshes. These details help an agent anticipate side effects and output.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded and the method is concise, but the Sphinx-style :param:/:returns: text duplicates the fully documented schema. The stage paragraph also contains promotional phrasing ('the floor, not the whole experience') that could be tightened.

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?

For a two-parameter file-writing tool with no output schema, it explains the return dict and the interactive stage behavior. It omits error handling and output-file naming or overwrite conventions, which are relevant for a write operation, but overall it is sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description repeats the same file_path and output_dir meanings without adding format, naming, or overwrite semantics. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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: splitting a multi-component mesh into separate STL files by detecting disconnected bodies via shared-edge analysis. It is clear enough to distinguish from generic mesh tools, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as split_mesh_to_fit or separate_overlapping_parts.

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 implied by the multi-component scenario, and the default output directory is mentioned. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or routing to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria.

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