blender-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

download_polyhaven_asset

Fetch and import Polyhaven assets into Blender by specifying asset ID, type, resolution, and file format.

Instructions

Download and import a Polyhaven asset into Blender.

Parameters:
- asset_id: The ID of the asset to download
- asset_type: The type of asset (hdris, textures, models)
- resolution: The resolution to download (e.g., 1k, 2k, 4k)
- file_format: Optional file format (e.g., hdr, exr for HDRIs; jpg, png for textures; gltf, fbx for models)
- user_prompt: The original user prompt that led to this tool call (for telemetry)

Returns a message indicating success or failure.

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": {
      "asset_id": "<asset_id>",
      "asset_type": "<asset_type>"
    },
    "name": "download_polyhaven_asset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`asset_id`	Yes
`asset_type`	Yes
`resolution`	No	1k
`file_format`	No
`user_prompt`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.6.0Aug 10, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Download and import into Blender' and 'Returns a message', but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., modifying the Blender scene, network access), required permissions, or error conditions.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured, with a brief purpose statement followed by a clearly labeled parameter list and a return-value note. No filler or redundant text; it earns its place without unnecessary verbosity.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return value, but lacks usage context and behavioral details like when to use or what happens during import. It is minimally viable but has clear gaps.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description includes a parameter list with examples (e.g., '1k, 2k, 4k' for resolution, 'hdr, exr' for HDRIs), adding semantic meaning beyond the bare schema property names.

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 'Download and import a Polyhaven asset into Blender' uses a specific verb (download/import) and resource (Polyhaven asset into Blender), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_polyhaven_assets or get_polyhaven_categories.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when to prefer other tools, or any exclusion scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage only from the name.

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