Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Goxel-MCP

Goxel-MCP

by yberudev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Add voxels

goxel_add_voxels

Batch-add or replace many individual voxels in one operation to insert script-computed geometry; use drawing primitives for shapes.

Instructions

Add (or replace) many individual voxels in a single operation. Best for geometry computed by a script. For shapes use goxel_draw_primitive.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "voxels": "<voxels>"
    },
    "name": "goxel_add_voxels"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
colorNoDefault color for voxels without a color
layerNoLayer (created if the name does not exist)
voxelsYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses bulk mutation and the possibility of replacement, but does not explain replacement semantics, overwrite behavior, atomicity, limits, layer creation, or failure modes.

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 three short sentences with no filler. The primary operation is front-loaded, followed immediately by the usage qualifier and the sibling alternative.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not cover return behavior, limits, layer behavior, default color application, or what "replace" does to existing voxels.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is moderate at 67%, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond implying a voxel array. It does not mention color, layer, or the 200,000-voxel limit, so it does not compensate for the undocumented coordinate semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Add (or replace) many individual voxels in a single operation." It also distinguishes the tool from a sibling by directing shape creation to goxel_draw_primitive. An agent can understand the tool's role without opening the schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives an explicit use case ("Best for geometry computed by a script") and an explicit alternative for a different task ("For shapes use goxel_draw_primitive"). The when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are both stated directly.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools