Skip to main content
Glama
full-aigc-plugins

partme_blender

by full-aigc-plugins
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

sculpt.brush_stroke

blender_sculpt_brush_stroke

Execute a sculpt brush stroke in Blender by providing a series of 3D coordinate points, enabling precise sculpting actions through remote MCP integration.

Instructions

PartMe Blender Harness command sculpt.brush_stroke. Risk: standard; maturity: L3. Requirements: Per-request argument checks and session policy still apply; Foreground window with a VIEW_3D area

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
pointsYes
objectIdNo
_requestIdNoStable request id for replay safety
_authorizationNoAction-bound Harness authorization claim
_transactionIdYesHarness milestone transaction id
_expectedSceneRevisionNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.2.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / points / items
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Three finite numbers; rotation uses radians",
+  "items": {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "maxItems": 3,
+  "minItems": 3,
+  "type": "array"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

D1.3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations are all false and provide no safety signal. The description adds risk level and maturity but does not disclose what the operation does, whether it mutates data, or what side effects occur. Minimal behavioral context.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The text is short, but that brevity is under-specification rather than conciseness. It lacks essential information and does not front-load the purpose; it is just a shell of metadata.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a complex brush-stroke tool with 7 parameters and no parameter documentation in the description, this is grossly incomplete. It fails to explain the operation, inputs, or expected output, even though an output schema exists.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is only 43%, and the description mentions no parameters. It adds zero meaning to any of the 7 parameters, so the agent is left without hints for points, name, objectId, etc.

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

Purpose1/5

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

The description never states what the tool does; it only names the command and lists requirements. There is no verb, resource, or scope, so an agent cannot tell it apart from siblings like blender_sculpt_displace or blender_sculpt_set_mask.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It only lists prerequisites (foreground VIEW_3D area) but no conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess.

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