Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kazaplan-mcp

kazaplan-mcp

by padupuy
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Kz Set Material

kz_set_material

Applies a coating such as tile, paint, wallpaper or grass to a chosen floor, ceiling, wall, single accent wall, or exterior ground in the 3D home design.

Instructions

Applique un revêtement (material-…). target :

  • "floor:<pièce>" : sol de la pièce (carrelage, parquet…) ;

  • "ceiling:<pièce>" : plafond de la pièce (peinture), visible seulement en vue 3D ;

  • "wall:<pièce>" : toutes les faces de mur tournées vers la pièce (peinture, papier peint, faïence) ;

  • "wall:<pièce>:<arête>" : un seul mur, index d'arête de kz_room_geometry (mur d'accent) ;

  • "ground" : terrain autour de la maison (gazon).

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": {
      "target": "<target>",
      "material_id": "<material_id>"
    },
    "name": "kz_set_material"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYes
material_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add genuine context beyond structured fields — notably that ceiling materials are visible only in the 3D view and that 'ground' refers to the terrain around the house — but it never says whether an existing material is overwritten, whether edits are reversible, or what happens on an invalid target.

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 verb-and-resource statement is front-loaded and the target forms are laid out as a scannable bulleted list, so almost every line earns its place. The dangling '(material-…)' fragment is an editing defect rather than a conciseness problem, but it does slightly degrade the structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the target vocabulary is thoroughly covered. For a mutation tool with zero annotations, however, the description should say more about overwrite behavior, required preconditions, and the material_id source; those omissions keep it at a merely adequate level.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must do the work, and it does an excellent job on 'target' by enumerating five accepted forms with their scopes, including the edge-index variant that links back to kz_room_geometry. The counterpart gap is 'material_id', which is only hinted at by the truncated '(material-…)' and never says where such an id comes from (kz_search_catalog or kz_catalog_item).

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Applique un revêtement'), making clear this assigns a surface material, which is distinguishable from placement/sketch siblings. The parenthetical '(material-…)' is truncated and never resolves what a material reference actually is, leaving a small but real ambiguity about the resource being applied.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied through the enumerated list of valid targets rather than stated as guidance: an agent can infer it should call this when a specific surface (floor, ceiling, wall, edge, ground) needs a material. There is no statement of prerequisites (does the room need to exist first?), no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative such as catalog lookup siblings for choosing a material.

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