verse-mcp

Check a scene's build status

get_scene_status

Read-only

Track an uploaded scene's build progress with status, stage, ETA, and completion link to know when it is ready to share.

Instructions

Check whether an uploaded scene has finished building. Returns status (compiling | done | error), the stage, progress 0..1, an ETA while building, and the link once done. Job records are kept for 2 hours after upload; older scenes are looked up in your account (needs VERSE_API_KEY).

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": {
      "scene": "<scene>"
    },
    "name": "get_scene_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scene`	Yes	Scene id (e.g. palm-villa-0a1b2c3d4e5f), the job id returned by upload_scene, or a Verse share link.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description discloses the return shape (status enum, stage, progress, ETA, link), the 2-hour job-retention window, and the authentication needed for account lookups. These are substantive behavioral facts an agent would otherwise have to discover by calling the tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by return fields and then the retention/auth caveat. Every clause carries information an agent needs; nothing is redundant.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and status values. The retention window and API-key requirement cover the remaining edge cases for a single-parameter read tool.

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 sole `scene` parameter already documents that it accepts a scene id, job id, or Verse share link. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Check whether an uploaded scene has finished building." That is clearly distinct from siblings like upload_scene and list_scenes, and an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

It implies the correct usage context (polling a scene after upload) and explains the lookup fallback for older scenes, including the VERSE_API_KEY requirement. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the when-to-use context is clear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server