Skip to main content
Glama

moving_estimate_object

Estimate moving or storage volume for oddly shaped objects from dimensions or a 3D scan, returning an inventory item for further calculations.

Instructions

Volume of one oddly shaped object from measured size, ready to add to an inventory.

Give dims ("36 x 72 x 12 in", [36, 72, 12] with dims_unit, or {length,width,height}; any order, default unit inches, no edge over 10 m) or path to a depth capture of the object on a surface, or a 3D scan export of it (a Scaniverse, Polycam or 3D Scanner App OBJ or PLY; a .zip holding the .obj, .mtl and texture is fine; the object is the one nearest the middle of the scan). For a scan the file's units and up axis are detected and reported in the notes; if that is wrong, pass scan_units (m|cm|mm|in: what the FILE is written in; Scaniverse writes meters) and up_axis (x|y|z, signs ok). The moving volume is the bounding box times a 0.75 fill factor, with a plus/minus; this is a loose envelope, so confidence is usually low-to-medium. Returns inventory_item to pass in moving_estimate_from_inventory(items=[...]) or moving_estimate_from_scan(extra_items=[...]), plus a comparison with the cube-sheet value when the name matches.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dimsNo
nameYes
pathNo
roomNo
unitsNoboth
up_axisNoauto
dims_unitNoin
referenceNo
scan_unitsNoauto

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers substantial behavioral context: the 0.75 bounding-box fill factor, the resulting low-to-medium confidence, auto-detection/reporting of scan units and up axis, supported formats (Scaniverse/Polycam/3D Scanner App OBJ/PLY, zipped OBJ+MTL), and how the target object is picked ('nearest the middle of the scan'). It omits any error/precedence behavior when both dims and path are supplied.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then walks input formats, unit handling, fill-factor math and return plumbing with no filler sentences. It is dense prose without formatting for a 9-param tool, but nearly every clause carries information the agent needs.

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 spelled out, and the description still summarizes them usefully. For a 9-parameter, 0%-coverage tool with three near-name siblings, though, the gaps around name/room/units/reference and the missing explicit sibling routing leave the agent under-informed for edge cases.

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 coverage is 0% across 9 params, so the description must compensate; it does well for the hard ones (dims accepted shapes and 10 m edge limit, path formats, scan_units semantics, up_axis signs). However it says nothing about name (the sole required param), room, units, or reference, so about half the parameters remain opaque.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Volume of one oddly shaped object from measured size'. An agent can tell this is the single-object estimator versus the bulk siblings moving_estimate_from_inventory and moving_estimate_from_scan. Sibling differentiation is only implied through the input description, not stated outright.

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?

Describes the input pathways (dims, depth-capture path, or 3D scan export) and where the result flows next (inventory_item for moving_estimate_from_inventory/from_scan). It never states when to prefer this tool over the two moving-estimate siblings or when it is inappropriate, leaving selection to inference.

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