VoxelForge

by thanakon228

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

voxelforge_export_obj_legacy

Export voxel scenes to Wavefront .obj files with legacy support for Goxel compatibility.

Instructions

Export เป็น Wavefront .obj (Goxel รองรับ).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "voxelforge_export_obj_legacy"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`scene_name`	No
`output_path`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

C2.1/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions format compatibility ('Goxel supports'), but fails to disclose any side effects, error conditions, or default behaviors for the optional parameters.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely short but under-specified. It is not front-loaded with critical information and fails to justify its brevity with sufficient clarity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the presence of a sibling tool with an identical name without 'legacy', and no output schema details despite the tool having one, the description is incomplete. It does not cover parameter behavior or return format.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention or explain either parameter (scene_name, output_path). The agent gets no additional meaning beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the tool exports to Wavefront .obj format, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish this legacy variant from the sibling voxelforge_export_obj, and the use of Thai language may reduce clarity for non-Thai agents.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs its non-legacy sibling or other export tools. No prerequisites or context provided for the optional parameters.

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