Skip to main content
Glama
rokibul-mist

rhino-mcp

by rokibul-mist
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

rhino_cmd_layer_create

Create new layers in Rhino with optional color and parent, and support nested sub-layers using :: to organize models.

Instructions

    Create a new layer.
    
    Args:
    name: Layer name (supports :: for sub-layers, e.g. 'Parent::Child').
    color_rgb: Optional comma-separated RGB string, e.g. '255,0,0'.
    parent: Optional parent layer name.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
parentNo
color_rgbNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that a layer is created and explains parameter formats, but it does not say what happens if the layer already exists, whether parent layers are auto-created, or what errors may occur. For a mutating tool this is a significant gap.

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 compact and well-structured: one clear purpose sentence followed by an Args list. Every sentence adds useful information with no filler or redundancy.

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?

Purpose and parameters are present, and an output schema exists to cover return values. However, the description omits behavior around duplicate layer names, parent layer prerequisites, and the relationship to the near-duplicate sibling rhino_layer_create, making it adequate but not complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does. It adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: the '::' sub-layer syntax for name, the comma-separated RGB format with an example for color_rgb, and the parent layer relationship.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Create a new layer.' This is unambiguous on its own, but it does not differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling rhino_layer_create, so it loses the top score.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rhino_layer_create, rhino_layer_list, or rhino_layer_set_color. No context, exclusions, or alternative routing is provided.

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