Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Goxel-MCP

Goxel-MCP

by yberudev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Draw primitives

goxel_draw_primitive

Apply up to 500 ordered voxel shape operations to add, remove, or paint boxes, spheres, cylinders, cones, lines, and points with layers, clip planes, and mirroring.

Instructions

Apply a list of up to 500 shape operations: box, sphere (or ellipsoid), cylinder (inner_radius for tires and tubes), cone, line (with a thickness) and points. Each operation has a mode: add (create / overwrite), remove (erase) or paint (recolor existing voxels only), an optional layer (created if missing), clip planes (for slopes and bevels) and mirror copies. Operations are applied in order; everything is validated before the scene is modified.

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": {
      "operations": "<operations>"
    },
    "name": "goxel_draw_primitive"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
previewNoAlso return a preview image
operationsYes
default_colorNoColor: "#rrggbb", "#rrggbbaa", [r,g,b] / [r,g,b,a] (0-255) or a name (black, white, red, darkred, green, darkgreen, blue, darkblue, lightblue, yellow, orange, amber, purple, pink, brown, gray, grey, darkgray, darkgrey, lightgray, lightgrey, silver, chrome, gold, cyan, magenta, glass, tinted)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it defines each mode ('add (create / overwrite), remove (erase), paint (recolor existing voxels only)'), states that layers are created if missing, that operations apply in order, and that the whole batch is validated before the scene is modified (implying atomic all-or-nothing semantics). It stops short of saying whether the operation is undoable or what an error mid-batch returns.

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?

Four dense sentences, zero filler: shapes first, then modes/layers/clips/mirror, then ordering and validation. Each clause carries information an agent needs, and the most important facts are front-loaded.

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 high-complexity, annotation-free tool with no output schema, this covers modes, layer creation, clipping, mirroring, ordering and atomic validation, which is most of what an agent needs. Missing are the return shape (aside from the schema-documented preview flag), undo behavior, and any note on coordinate conventions or units.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description adds real meaning on top of it — the 'mode' enum has no per-value description in the schema, yet the description explains add/remove/paint precisely, and it annotates cylinder `inner_radius` ('for tires and tubes') and line thickness. It doesn't explain `preview`, `default_color`, or `label`, but the core semantics are covered.

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 leads with a specific verb and resource ('Apply a list of up to 500 shape operations') and enumerates exactly which primitives are supported (box, sphere/ellipsoid, cylinder, cone, line, points). It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from overlapping siblings like goxel_add_voxels or goxel_recolor_region, which cover similar add/remove/recolor ground.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied: the enumeration of shapes and modes signals that this is the bulk-geometry tool, and 'operations are applied in order' hints at batch semantics. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no pointer to alternatives such as goxel_add_voxels for single placements or goxel_recolor_region for recoloring.

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