Skip to main content
Glama

blender_modifiers

Apply and manage mesh modifiers in Blender, including subsurf, bevel, mirror, solidify, array, boolean, decimate, displace, and wave. Add, remove, apply, or list modifiers on objects.

Instructions

Apply and manage mesh modifiers in Blender.

Supports multiple operations through the operation parameter:

  • add_subsurf: Add subdivision surface modifier

  • add_bevel: Add bevel modifier

  • add_mirror: Add mirror modifier

  • add_solidify: Add solidify modifier

  • add_array: Add array modifier

  • add_boolean: Add boolean modifier

  • add_decimate: Add decimation modifier

  • add_displace: Add displacement modifier

  • add_wave: Add wave modifier

  • remove_modifier: Remove a modifier

  • apply_modifier: Apply modifier to mesh

  • get_modifiers: List all modifiers on object

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoCount/repetitions (for array)
widthNoWidth/thickness (for solidify, bevel)
levelsNoSubdivision levels (for subsurf)
offsetNoOffset distance (for solidify)
segmentsNoNumber of segments (for bevel, screw)
operationNoModifier operation typeadd_subsurf
angle_limitNoAngle limit in degrees (for edge split)
object_nameNoName of object to modify
modifier_nameNoName of modifier to operate on
modifier_typeNoType of modifier to addSUBSURF
render_levelsNoRender subdivision levels
merge_thresholdNoMerge threshold (for mirror)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations provide no safety hints (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint are all false), so the description carries the transparency burden. It lists operations like apply_modifier and remove_modifier without warning about their potentially destructive/irreversible nature. It does reveal basic behavior through operation names, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or workflow consequences.

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 concise and well-structured. It opens with a clear one-sentence summary, then lists operations in a scannable bullet format. No redundant or filler content; every line adds informational value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description covers all intended operations and parameter categories sufficiently for a tool of this complexity. It could be more explicit about which parameters are required for each operation and whether object_name is mandatory. An output schema exists, so return value details are not necessary. The main gap is missing prerequisites or interaction notes, showing slight incompleteness.

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?

The schema already provides descriptions for all 12 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by enumerating the valid values for the 'operation' parameter and implicitly linking parameters to operations (e.g., add_array uses count, add_subsurf uses levels). This goes beyond the schema's generic 'Modifier operation type' description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Apply and manage mesh modifiers in Blender' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like blender_mesh and construct_object by focusing exclusively on modifiers. The list of supported operations further clarifies the tool's scope.

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?

The described operations imply when the tool should be used (e.g., add_subsurf for subdivision, remove_modifier for removal), but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, making the usage context implicit rather than explicit.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/sandraschi/blender-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server