Skip to main content
Glama
rokibul-mist

rhino-mcp

by rokibul-mist
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

rhino_open_file

Open an existing Rhino 3DM model by providing its absolute file path, making the geometry available for editing and automation.

Instructions

    Open an existing Rhino file.
    
    Args:
    controller: RhinoController instance.
    file_path: Absolute path to the .3dm file to open.
    
    Returns:
    Dict with command result.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
file_pathYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose that opening a file may replace the current document, discard unsaved changes, or fail on missing/invalid paths. The return is only vaguely described as a 'Dict with command result'.

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 compact and well-structured, with a clear opening statement and labeled Args/Returns sections. The stray controller parameter adds minor noise but does not significantly harm readability.

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?

For a simple single-parameter operation, the description covers the purpose, the key parameter, and the return type, and an output schema exists. However, it lacks alternative routing and side-effect disclosure, so it is only minimally 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?

The description adds useful meaning for file_path by specifying it must be an absolute path to a .3dm file, which compensates for the 0% schema coverage. However, it also lists a 'controller' argument that is not present in the input schema, potentially misleading the agent.

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?

States a specific verb ('Open') and resource ('existing Rhino file'), and identifies the .3dm extension. It is clear in isolation, though it does not differentiate from sibling tools like rhino_open or gh_open_file.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as rhino_open, gh_open_file, rhino_import, or rhino_new_document. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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