Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Construct

Construct

by rtmandreyev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

hologram_validate

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validates a tessera-hologram sheet and returns a list of errors, so you can catch invalid part, size, or joint definitions before building a glTF, OBJ, 3MF, or STL model.

Instructions

Validate a tessera-hologram sheet; returns error list.

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": {
      "sheet": "<sheet>"
    },
    "name": "hologram_validate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sheetYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is an error list, but with no output schema it never says whether success is an empty list, null, or a boolean, nor what fields an error entry carries.

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?

A single short clause pair with zero filler and the verb front-loaded. The semicolon fragment is terse but readable; it is under-specified rather than padded, which is preferable to verbosity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool that takes a nested object and returns a list with no output schema to explain the return shape, the description leaves both ends undocumented. The agent knows what the tool claims to do but not what to pass or what to expect back.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single required parameter `sheet` is a nested object with 0% schema description coverage, and the description only restates that it is a "tessera-hologram sheet." Nothing about its expected structure, required keys, or acceptable input forms is added beyond the schema's bare `type: object`.

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?

Names a specific verb ("Validate") and a specific resource ("tessera-hologram sheet"), which is enough to separate it from compile-style siblings by inference. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly or stating what makes a sheet invalid, so differentiation is only implied.

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 when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative among hologram_compile or construct_diagnose. An agent must guess that validation precedes compilation rather than being told so.

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