Skip to main content
Glama

Organize Assets by Type

blender_organize_assets_by_type
Destructive

Organize Blender scene assets into collections by type (models, materials, etc.) to clean up disorganized scenes and improve management workflows.

Instructions

Automatically organize scene assets into collections based on object type.

This intelligent organization tool creates collections for different asset types (models, materials, etc.) and moves objects accordingly.

Args:

  • create_collections (boolean, default true): Create collections for each asset type

  • existing_objects_only (boolean, default true): Only organize existing objects

  • prefix_with_type (boolean, default false): Prefix object names with asset type

Returns: Organization summary with collections created and objects moved

Examples:

  • Basic organization: create_collections=true, existing_objects_only=true, prefix_with_type=false

  • Include new objects: create_collections=true, existing_objects_only=false

  • Naming convention: create_collections=true, prefix_with_type=true

Use when: Cleaning up disorganized scenes, establishing asset workflows, improving scene management Don't use when: Fine-grained manual control needed, complex custom organization

Performance: Moderate impact depending on scene size and object count

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
create_collectionsNoCreate collections for each asset type
existing_objects_onlyNoOnly organize existing objects
prefix_with_typeNoPrefix object names with asset type
Behavior4/5

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains the 'moderate impact depending on scene size and object count' (performance implications), describes what gets created and moved (collections and objects), and clarifies the intelligent/organizational nature. While annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, the description elaborates on what gets modified without contradiction.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, args, returns, examples, usage guidelines, performance). While comprehensive, some redundancy exists between the 'Args' section and schema descriptions. Every sentence serves a purpose, but the parameter documentation could be more concise given the schema coverage.

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?

For a destructive tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description provides excellent completeness: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, parameter usage through examples, performance characteristics, and return value expectations ('organization summary'). The combination of purpose, guidelines, and behavioral context makes this highly complete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all three boolean parameters thoroughly. The description's 'Args' section repeats this information without adding significant semantic context beyond what's in the schema. The examples provide usage patterns but don't enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('organize', 'creates collections', 'moves objects') and resources ('scene assets', 'collections', 'objects'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on automated organization by type rather than manual collection management (blender_add_to_collection) or individual object operations.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' sections with concrete scenarios ('cleaning up disorganized scenes', 'fine-grained manual control needed'). This gives clear guidance on when to choose this automated tool versus alternatives that offer more control.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/olbboy/claudekit-blender-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server