Skip to main content
Glama

asset

Create 3D geometry parametrically, arrange along paths or in batches, undo actions, and save subtrees as prefabs. Also lists available shapes and materials.

Instructions

参数化 3D shape 生成(11 shape)+ 路径阵列 + batch + undo + save 预制件。create/path/batch/undo/save 经 editor 持久化(视口可见、可 undo);list_shapes/list_materials 静态返回。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNopath 采样模式
nameNo节点名(碰撞自增 _001)
pathNopath: [[x,y,z],...] ≥2 点(与 path_node 互斥)
alignNopath 朝向(默认 path)
countNopath discrete: 等数量(与 spacing 互斥)
itemsNobatch: [{shape,params,material,name,...}] ≤64
scaleNo[x,y,z]
shapeNocreate/path: shape 名(见 list_shapes)
actionYes操作类型
paramsNoshape 参数(见 list_shapes 默认值)
parentNo父节点路径(绝对 /Root/X 或相对 X/Y)
spacingNopath discrete: 等间距(与 count 互斥)
materialNo预设名 / PBR dict(color(hex),alpha,emissive,metallic,roughness)/ res://.tres / null
positionNo[x,y,z]
rotationNo[x,y,z] 弧度
node_pathNosave: 要存的子树节点路径
path_nodeNopath: 场景 Path3D 节点路径(与 path 互斥)
project_pathNoGodot 项目目录
resource_pathNosave: res://xxx.tscn 输出路径
align_verticesNopath continuous+spacing: 折线顶点段边界对齐
Behavior4/5

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

The description discloses that create/path/batch/undo/save are persisted through the editor and are undoable, while list_shapes/list_materials return statically. This adds behavioral context beyond the sparse annotations (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false) and does not contradict them.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core functionality and then clarify the behavioral split between persistent and static operations. Every clause conveys essential information with no redundant filler.

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?

For a tool with 20 parameters and 7 actions, the description gives adequate high-level orientation: it lists the main capabilities and the key behavioral distinction (persistent vs static). The rich schema covers parameter details, and while there is no output schema, the description's brevity is acceptable given the schema's depth.

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 100%, with every parameter individually documented. The tool description only aggregates actions into persistent/static behavior without adding parameter-specific semantics, so it adds no meaningful value beyond the existing schema descriptions.

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: parameterized 3D shape generation (11 shapes) plus path arrays, batch, undo, and save prefab capabilities. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools covering unrelated domains like editor, ui, or screenshot.

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 description provides clear context by grouping actions into those that persist via editor (create/path/batch/undo/save) and those that are static (list_shapes/list_materials). It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when-not-to-use, but the persistence distinction effectively guides usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/wgt19861219/godot-mcp-enhanced'

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