Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
PhySpace-Forge

PhySpace-Forge

by jason12343
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Hybrid

physpace_compile_universal_asset

Compile a 3D object or material description into a calibrated Shell-Core primitive with contact areas and gravity equilibrium, then export it to MuJoCo, OpenUSD, URDF, or glTF.

Instructions

Compile a 3D object or semantic material description into a calibrated Shell-Core Physical Primitive with exact barycentric tributary contact areas A_k and Frame-0 gravity equilibrium, and export it directly to a universal industry format: MuJoCo MJCF (.xml), NVIDIA OpenUSD (.usda), ROS2 URDF (.urdf), or Blender glTF (.gltf).

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": {
      "display_name": "<display_name>",
      "export_format": "<export_format>"
    },
    "name": "physpace_compile_universal_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mu_staticNoStatic friction coefficient mu_s.
display_nameYesSemantic name/description of the 3D object (e.g., 'Thin Champagne Flute').
export_formatYesTarget universal simulator format.
profile_curveNo3D manifold topology profile.
yield_stress_kpaNoYield/crush stress threshold sigma_y in kPa.
youngs_modulus_kpaNoYoung's modulus E in kPa.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and falls short on the most consequential point: 'export it directly to a universal industry format' does not say whether the tool writes a file to disk, returns file content, or returns a path/handle, nor how errors are surfaced. It also omits whether the optional material parameters (mu_static, youngs_modulus_kpa, yield_stress_kpa) have defaults, whether the compile step is deterministic, and what happens to an unsupported profile_curve.

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?

A single sentence that leads with the verb and ends with the concrete enumeration of output formats, so the export choice is front-and-center where the agent needs it. There is little wasted text, though the dense technical phrasing ('calibrated Shell-Core Physical Primitive with exact barycentric tributary contact areas') is harder to parse than it needs to be.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a six-parameter generative/export tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what the caller receives back and how the produced asset is delivered; it does not. The absence of an output schema shifts responsibility for describing the result onto the description, and that responsibility is not met. It is adequate on what the tool computes, but incomplete on operation and return behavior.

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%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already explains all six parameters, including units (kPa) and enum meanings. The description's one genuine addition is mapping each export_format enum value to its ecosystem and file extension (mjcf to MuJoCo .xml, usda to OpenUSD, urdf to ROS2, gltf to Blender). It adds nothing about profile_curve, mu_static, or how the physical parameters interact with the 'Shell-Core' calibration.

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 states a specific verb (compile) plus a concrete transformation: a 3D object or semantic material description into a 'Shell-Core Physical Primitive' with defined outputs, then exported to one of four named formats with file extensions. This is clearly distinct from the sibling tools (inspect, simulate, generate scene, step shield), though the siblings are never named explicitly. The heavy jargon ('barycentric tributary contact areas A_k', 'Frame-0 gravity equilibrium') is precise but reduces immediate readability.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the sibling tools as alternatives. The agent can infer this is the asset-generation step, but nothing says whether it must follow physpace_inspect_object_safety_envelope or precede physpace_simulate_grasp_trajectory. No prerequisites, ordering, or selection criteria are given.

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