Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Goxel-MCP

Goxel-MCP

by yberudev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Layers

goxel_layers

Manage voxel model layers: list, create, delete, rename, show/hide, set active, duplicate, clear, or merge one layer into another and remove the source.

Instructions

Manage layers: list, create, delete, rename, set_visible, set_active, duplicate, clear, merge_into (copy the voxels of the layer into 'target' and delete it).

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": {
      "action": "<action>"
    },
    "name": "goxel_layers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoNew name (create / rename / duplicate)
layerNoLayer name or id (default: the active layer)
actionYes
targetNoTarget layer (merge_into)
visibleNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the key destructive behavior — merge_into 'copies voxels into target and deletes it' — which is genuinely useful. But it says nothing about delete/clear being irreversible, whether goxel_undo can recover them, or what an invalid layer reference does.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single dense sentence that front-loads the verb 'Manage layers' before the action list, with the one non-obvious action annotated inline. No wasted text, though the bare comma list is slightly hard to scan.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action space but omits return value expectations for 'list', undo/recoverability after destructive actions, and behavior of levers like visible/active-layer defaults. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 60%, and the description adds intent-level mapping for name (create/rename/duplicate) and target (merge_into). It adds nothing for the undescribed 'visible' parameter and does not explain the layer-selection semantics beyond what the schema already states.

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 states the resource (layers) and enumerates the full verb set (list, create, delete, rename, set_visible, set_active, duplicate, clear, merge_into), so an agent knows exactly what domain this tool covers. Sibling differentiation is implicit rather than stated — it is the only layer-oriented tool among voxel/scene/render siblings, but the description never says so.

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?

The action list makes the intended usage self-evident and the merge_into parenthetical clarifies a non-obvious action. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings, no prerequisites (e.g., needing an active layer for set_visible), and no note about defaults.

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