Scale a Blender object by [x,y,z] values, either multiplying its current scale or setting an absolute scale. Adjust object size for precise asset modeling.
Scale an object. By default scale multiplies the current scale.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| scale | Yes | [x, y, z] in Blender units | |
| absolute | No | Set the scale outright instead of multiplying the current one |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key behavior: scaling multiplies the current scale by default, and the absolute flag can set it outright. However, it omits other behavioral aspects such as effects on local vs world space, whether the operation is reversible, or what happens if the object does not exist. It provides the most essential behavior but not full transparency.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose and then clarifies the default behavior. It is efficient and free of fluff, appropriate for a simple transformation tool. However, it is so brief that it may under-specify edge cases, but for the given tool complexity it is suitably concise.
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 simple tool with three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (scale with default multiplicative vs absolute) and the schema covers the parameter details. It does not mention error handling or object selection nuances, but these are not critical for basic usage. Given the lack of annotations and the presence of many sibling tools, it is minimally complete but could benefit from a note on when to use absolute vs relative.
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?
Schema description coverage is 67%, covering the scale and absolute parameters. The description adds value by explaining the default multiplicative behavior of the scale array, which is not fully explicit in the schema. The name parameter is left undescribed, but its purpose is obvious from context. This aligns with the baseline for high schema coverage, with a slight boost from the added semantic detail.
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 the action ('Scale an object') and identifies the resource (an object via name). It also clarifies the default multiplicative behavior, which distinguishes it from absolute setting. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling transformation tools like set_transform or translate_object, so it falls short of fully distinguishing its scope.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of conditions that favor scale_object over set_transform, apply_transforms, or other transform tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description only explains the default behavior, not usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.