Converts Blender 3D coordinates to Assetto Corsa world coordinates using AC x = Bx, AC y = Bz, AC z = -By, so track and camera positions align between tools.
Convert Blender coordinates to AC world coordinates (AC x = Bx, AC y = Bz, AC z = -By).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| x | Yes | ||
| y | Yes | ||
| z | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and it does disclose the exact deterministic transformation with no side effects implied. It does not state what happens with non-numeric or missing input, but as a pure math transform the behavioral profile is essentially transparent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
One sentence, front-loaded with the purpose, with the mapping appended as compact clarification. Zero waste.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description fully specifies the transform. For a 3-parameter pure conversion tool, nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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 the formula (AC x = Bx, AC y = Bz, AC z = -By) effectively documents each input as a Blender-space component and its mapping. It does not restate that x/y/z are numbers, but that is clear from the schema types and formula.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (convert) and both resources (Blender coordinates to AC world coordinates), and even gives the exact mapping. It is trivially distinguishable from all sibling tools, which are state/camera/session operations.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The input/output framing makes the trigger obvious: use it when you have Blender-space coordinates and need AC-space ones. No alternatives or exclusions are named, but for a pure coordinate transform there are no meaningful siblings to distinguish from.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.