Skip to main content
Glama

blender_validation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate 3D models and avatars against platform-specific requirements for VRChat, Unity, and more, performing pre-flight checks on geometry, materials, rigging, and transforms.

Instructions

Comprehensive validation tools for avatars and 3D models.

Performs pre-flight checks to ensure models meet platform requirements for VRChat, Resonite, Unity, and other 3D platforms.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
operationNoValidation operation typevalidate_avatar
bone_limitNoCustom bone count limit override
object_nameNo
check_riggingNoWhether to validate bone structure and rigging
check_texturesNoWhether to validate texture requirements
material_limitNoCustom material count limit override
check_materialsNoWhether to validate materials and draw calls
polycount_limitNoCustom polycount limit override
target_platformNoTarget platform ("vrchat", "resonite", "unity", "generic")vrchat
check_transformsNoWhether to check for unapplied transforms

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / object_name
      Added value: +{
      +  "default": "",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / properties / operation / enum
      Previous value: -[
      -  "validate_avatar",
      -  "validate_model",
      -  "check_polycount",
      -  "check_materials",
      -  "check_rigging",
      -  "check_transforms",
      -  "check_textures"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "validate_avatar",
      +  "validate_model",
      +  "validate_geometry",
      +  "check_manifold",
      +  "check_polycount",
      +  "check_materials",
      +  "check_rigging",
      +  "check_transforms",
      +  "check_textures"
      +]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no significant behavioral context beyond 'performs pre-flight checks', which aligns with the annotations but does not disclose additional traits like output format or side effects (though output schema exists).

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's primary function. It avoids redundancy and lists multiple target platforms in a compact manner, making every word earn its place.

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?

Given the 10 parameters, an operation enum, and an output schema, the description provides sufficient high-level context. It does not enumerate each operation, but the schema's operation enum covers that detail. The description is complete enough for selecting and invoking the tool, though it could briefly mention the variety of checks available.

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 description coverage is 90%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself adds no parameter explanations, but the input schema already documents most parameters with descriptions. The description does not compensate for the single undocumented parameter (object_name), but overall the schema carries the burden.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Comprehensive validation tools for avatars and 3D models' with a specific verb (validation) and resource (avatars/3D models). It emphasizes 'pre-flight checks' for platform requirements, which differentiates it from sibling tools like blender_mesh or blender_export that focus on other activities.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'pre-flight checks to ensure models meet platform requirements' gives clear context for when to use (before platform upload). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternative tools, so it stops short of full exclusionary guidance.

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