Skip to main content
Glama
opslon

BlenderMCP

by opslon

get_polyhaven_status

Check if PolyHaven integration is enabled in Blender to verify availability of PolyHaven features for 3D modeling and scene creation.

Instructions

Check if PolyHaven integration is enabled in Blender. Returns a message indicating whether PolyHaven features are available.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • Implementation of the get_polyhaven_status tool. It communicates with Blender via send_command to retrieve the status.
    @mcp.tool()
    def get_polyhaven_status(ctx: Context) -> str:
        """
        Check if PolyHaven integration is enabled in Blender.
        Returns a message indicating whether PolyHaven features are available.
        """
        try:
            blender = get_blender_connection()
            result = blender.send_command("get_polyhaven_status")
            enabled = result.get("enabled", False)
            message = result.get("message", "")
            if enabled:
                message += "PolyHaven is good at Textures, and has a wider variety of textures than Sketchfab."
            return message
        except Exception as e:
            logger.error(f"Error checking PolyHaven status: {str(e)}")
            return f"Error checking PolyHaven status: {str(e)}"
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool 'returns a message indicating whether PolyHaven features are available,' which implies a read-only, non-destructive operation. However, it lacks details on behavioral traits: no information on error handling, performance (e.g., latency), authentication needs, or the format of the returned message (e.g., boolean, string, structured data). For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded: two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second clarifies the return value. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and return type, but lacks context about integration state (e.g., what 'enabled' means, potential error messages, or dependencies). For a status-check tool in a Blender environment, more detail on typical outputs or failure modes would improve completeness.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (as there are no parameters to describe). The description doesn't need to add parameter semantics, so a baseline of 4 is appropriate. It correctly implies no inputs are required, aligning with the empty schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Check if PolyHaven integration is enabled in Blender.' It specifies the verb ('check') and resource ('PolyHaven integration'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_polyhaven_categories' or 'search_polyhaven_assets' by focusing on status verification rather than data retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other status-checking tools like 'get_hunyuan3d_status' or 'get_sketchfab_status' beyond the resource name.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., whether Blender must be running), use cases (e.g., before attempting PolyHaven downloads), or exclusions (e.g., not for checking other integrations). Given siblings like 'download_polyhaven_asset' that depend on this status, explicit usage context is missing.

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/opslon/blender-mcp-optimized'

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