Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Kiln

Kiln

by codeofaxel
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

verify_mesh_measurements

Read-only

Measure a mesh file against specified expected values and return a receipt showing what was requested, measured, and matched.

Instructions

Measure a mesh file against the numbers it's supposed to hit and get back a receipt: what was asked, what was measured, what matched.

Needs Kiln Pro.

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": {
      "mesh_path": "<mesh_path>",
      "measurements": "<measurements>"
    },
    "name": "verify_mesh_measurements"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mesh_pathYesPath to the mesh file to measure; a STEP file is converted to a mesh first. A path that is not a file is refused.
measurementsYesA non-empty list of entries, one per number to check, each ``{label, measurement, value}`` with optional ``tolerance``, ``origin``, ``why``, ``module`` and (for ``hole_positions``) ``positions``; ``measurement`` is ``bbox_x`` / ``bbox_y`` / ``bbox_z`` / ``volume_mm3`` / ``hole_count`` / ``min_hole_diameter`` / ``min_wall_thickness_mm`` / ``watertight`` / ``single_body`` / ``hole_positions``. An empty list, or an entry that cannot be read, is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / measurements / description
      Added value: +"A non-empty list of entries, one per number to check, each ``{label, measurement, value}`` with optional ``tolerance``, ``origin``, ``why``, ``module`` and (for ``hole_positions``) ``positions``; ``measurement`` is ``bbox_x`` / ``bbox_y`` / ``bbox_z`` / ``volume_mm3`` / ``hole_count`` / ``min_hole_diameter`` / ``min_wall_thickness_mm`` / ``watertight`` / ``single_body`` / ``hole_positions``.  An empty list, or an entry that cannot be read, is refused."
    • addedInput schema / properties / mesh_path / description
      Added value: +"Path to the mesh file to measure; a STEP file is converted to a mesh first.  A path that is not a file is refused."
  2. Addedv1.5.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds two things beyond them: the tier requirement ('Needs Kiln Pro') and the return shape ('a receipt: what was asked, what was measured, what matched'), which matters because there is no output schema. It does not disclose refusal behavior or performance characteristics, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler; the receipt clauses are slightly repetitive but each carries information about the return value. The tier requirement is correctly placed as a short trailing line rather than buried.

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 read-only tool with fully documented schema, the definition covers what is needed: what it does, the tier gate, and a summary of the result shape in lieu of an output schema. The one remaining gap is that the actual result structure (per-measurement pass/fail, mismatch detail) is only loosely sketched as 'what matched'.

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 both parameters are documented in detail in the schema itself, including the allowed measurement kinds and the refused-input cases. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource ('Measure a mesh file') and states the comparison intent ('against the numbers it's supposed to hit'), which is more than a restatement of the name. The phrasing 'numbers it's supposed to hit' is colloquial rather than naming measurements/tolerances explicitly, so it falls short of a fully precise statement of what is verified.

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 'Needs Kiln Pro' line is a genuine prerequisite that tells the agent when the tool is callable, and the comparison framing implies the verification use case. However, it never distinguishes this tool from near-siblings such as verify_mesh_fit, mesh_quality_scorecard, or analyze_mesh_geometry, and gives no when-not-to-use guidance.

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