Create a new layer in 3ds Max with optional RGB color and hidden state, enabling organized scene management through MCP.
新建一个层，可选设置颜色与初始隐藏状态。 [English] Create a layer, optionally with a colour and initial hidden state.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | 层名称。 | Layer name. | |
| color | No | RGB 颜色 [0-255]，可选。 | RGB colour [0-255], optional. | |
| hidden | No | 是否隐藏该层，默认否。 | Hide the layer, default false. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already mark the operation as mutating and destructive (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint true), and the description does not contradict them. It adds that a colour and initial hidden state can be set, but it does not disclose side effects such as duplicate-name behavior or whether the new layer becomes active.
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?
The description is compact and contains no filler: one Chinese sentence and one English sentence carry the full meaning. The core action and optional parameters are front-loaded.
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?
For a low-complexity creation tool with fully documented parameters and supportive annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. It does not describe the return value or duplicate/active-layer behavior, but those are not essential for a basic create call.
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?
The schema has 100% description coverage and already documents name, color as an RGB array [0-255], and hidden with a default of false. The description re-states the optional colour and hidden state but provides no additional semantic detail beyond the schema.
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?
The description clearly states a specific action ('Create a layer') and the resource, while adding the optional parameters (colour and initial hidden state). This makes it easy to distinguish from sibling layer operations such as list_layers, delete_layer, and set_layer_properties.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_layer_properties or delete_layer. The intended context is only implied by the verb 'create' rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.