Skip to main content
Glama
zinin

sketchup-mcp2

by zinin

create_finger_joint

Create a finger joint between two overlapping boards. Configure depth, width, height, and offsets to position the joint relative to board face centers.

Instructions

Create a finger joint (box joint) between two boards.

All dimensions in millimeters; offsets shift the joint from the board face's center. Defaults are sized for ~100 mm boards. The two boards must already touch/overlap along the joint axis.

Returns: JSON {board1: {id, name, type, bbox_mm|null}, board2: {...}, boolean_cuts: {attempted, failed}} — non-zero failed means some cuts did not apply (likely non-manifold geometry); verify via bbox_mm.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoJoint depth in mm
widthNoJoint width in mm
heightNoJoint height in mm
offset_xNoJoint offset from the board face's center along X, mm
offset_yNoJoint offset from the board face's center along Y, mm
offset_zNoJoint offset from the board face's center along Z, mm
board1_idYesEntity ID from a previous response (integer or its string form)
board2_idYesEntity ID from a previous response (integer or its string form)
num_fingersNoNumber of fingers

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return JSON structure, explains failure modes (non-manifold geometry via boolean_cuts.failed), and advises verification via bbox_mm. It also notes offsets shift from board face center and default sizes. Could further clarify if operation is reversible, but overall good.

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 concise: a clear purpose statement, a compact paragraph of key details, and a structured return description. Every sentence contributes meaning, no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 params, output schema, no annotations), the description covers prerequisites, parameter interpretation, and failure modes concisely. It could include an example or more guidance on selecting board IDs, but the output schema reduces the need for return value details.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating all dimensions are in millimeters, explaining offsets shift from board face center, and noting defaults are sized for ~100 mm boards. This contextualizes the parameters beyond their individual 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 it creates a finger joint (box joint) between two boards, using specific verbs and resource. It names the joint type, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_dovetail and create_mortise_tenon.

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: boards must already touch/overlap along the joint axis. However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as dovetail or mortise-tenon, though the naming makes it implicit.

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/zinin/sketchup-mcp2'

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