Full Version: mcp-bridge-for-moi: let an AI agent model in MoI while you watch

Show messages:  1  2-21  22-37

I suppose that you can talk to the AI ? (against write )

When Claude is used does it limited in time ? (in free)

---

Nice...but to me the most relaxing thing to me is to drawing.

but can it make scripts?
I need Rhino multipipe in Moi :D

---

Always interesting to watch these things work.

It's also always interesting to watch the tokens cash register Ka-ching its way inexorably upwards

Looks like it cost about 20,000 tokens to get there

Question: I tried to look the cost up for the job and I got INPUT tokens and OUTPUT tokens

sooooooo... are these input or output tokens your program has in the costing? There's a 400% difference.

https://tokencalculator.ai/

---

Hey Pilou,
I didn't quite understand your first question, but if you mean 'talking' to the agent, then yes, there are tools like 'Whisper Flow' that can help with that.
Unfortunately, you can't use a free Claude account for this – you need a paid tier to access the MCP via Claude Code.

---

Hey Matadem,
No, scripting capabilities are outside the scope of the MCP server.
However, if you're interested in agentic AI capabilities: I'm sure that Claude (and other AIs, although I'd recommend Claude) could help you develop what you need for MoI.

---

Hey ado1,
I would highly recommend working with agentic AI on a paid subscription tier, such as a "Claude Pro" account. API requests will cost you a fortune; this is definitely not the way to go about it in my opinion.
As for the MCP tokens, I honestly have no idea — I didn't pay attention to how many it used.
The MCP server is the first part of my plan to automate modelling. My initial idea was to go from a hand-drawn sketch to a NURBS prototype in the shortest possible time. I am currently working on the second part, which will involve taking a hand-drawn or AI-generated image and modelling it in MoI. It's a long shot, but the initial tests are promising.

---

Yes talk with a microphone! :)
But i don't want use a paid Ai ;)

---

Don't get me wrong, it looks amazing.

It's those devil in the detail dollar things that people need to know before committing

Your "drawing" route looks like a very interesting route

There are many out of production items from the 20th and 19th century that would benefit from modern methods

edit: and MOI can scale items very precisely, so the initial output only needs accuracy in any scale whatsoever

Image Attachments:
harrison1.jpg 

---

Pilou,
You can use open-source AI libraries to achieve this.

---

Ah yes i remember this one! ;)
My Ai process from the some "bad" first image! :) False image of course like Canada dry! :)

---

ado1,
I understand your point — nowadays, everyone working with AI has to keep an eye on costs.

Your drawing looks intriguing — it might be a nice test drive. Thanks!
Regarding the scale of output, I agree. The main idea behind forcing the question of units in a fresh, unitless setup was to keep the workflow clean for the upcoming skill (e.g. if dimensions are written in a specific unit on the drawing by hand).

Claude understands prety well itsself precive dimensional drawing (video in the header of the GitHub repo show the modeling based on a sample Design Spark drawing:
https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/designspark-mechanical-drawing-add-on-maxing-its-potential

---

Yes. If you have a few precise measurements for a few easy parts contained in the original drawing then it will give the AI a good leg up.

---

@ Gabriel

You will not have the sort of same result in using "Windows Voice Access" ?

---

Pilou,
to my knowledge Windows Voice Access can't print in just any software because it relies entirely on the app's built-in design.
For Voice Access to trigger a print job, the software you are using must do at least one of three things:
- Support standard keyboard shortcuts (like Ctrl + P)
- Have a visible, accessible "Print" button that the AI can read and click
- Be built with standard Windows code structures that allow assistive technologies to "see" and control the menus.

Exactly for that reason, and as you mentioned, to avoid using a paid tier, I started building one on my own with Python and free AI speech-to-text libraries. Unfortunately, it's a closed repository at the moment (it's for my day job, so I can't publish it yet, but hopefully I will be able to in the near future).
If you're interested in AI-driven software development, I can tell you that, as far as I know, there are two major open-source players: "Whisper", published by OpenAI, and "Moonshine". These are the two I've been building my Python project on, and both work pretty well. Note: I was experimenting with 'Faster Whisper', as the name suggests. – it is faster. Here are both repos:

https://github.com/SYSTRAN/faster-whisper

https://github.com/moonshine-ai/moonshine

Cheers!
Gabriel

---

Ado1,

I was curious to give you a rough idea of the cost per token. Generally, input tokens are the data that you provide to the AI agent (e.g. text or drawings). The output is what the agent gives you back (text answers in the 'chat' — or the 'session', as it is called — and all the output needed to build the 3D model in MoI in this case).

To try out a more complex task, I provided Claude with your sample drawing (it took some thought, but I don't think "high" makes much difference at the current stage of MCP development). I also asked it to research additional sources online for precise dimensional drawings.
It started with my work-in-progress 'Sketch to 3D' skill, found some additional information on the web, and after about 13 minutes it gave me the attached scene.
I completely agree that this is far from the original drawing, with some obvious errors. I created the MCP server mostly for conceptual design, to produce rough 3D shapes as prototypes for different 3D printing projects.
But in terms of tokens: It used around 50,000 tokens on this model, which, on my paid 'Claude Pro' subscription, is around 8% of my usage limit within a five-hour window. This is basically how these plans work: you work, then you wait until the time window unblocks, then you work again.
This means it didn't use up many tokens, which makes me think that many MCP calls to MoI generally don't use up many tokens either.

It is also always interesting to observe the thinking process of an agent. For example, I asked iClaude to summarise all the uncertainties in an MD (Markdown) file, which it saved at the end of the session. I have also attached it here for reference.

Use cases are obviously always a consideration; I'll work on improving my 'sketch-to-3D' skill in the meantime and see what I can come up with.

Cheers,
Gabriel

Attachments:
harrison_headstock_open_questions.md
harrison_L5A_headstock.7z

Image Attachments:
harrison_L5A_headstock.png 

---

@ Gabriel for complete that you said

How to set up voice control (workaround):
Since MoI3D relies heavily on keyboard shortcuts (hotkeys) and scripts to launch commands, you can use voice-recognition-based dictation or macro tools on Windows.

Compatible software: Applications such as VoiceMacro, Talon Voice, Dragon, or the native Windows Voice Access tool.

How it works: You map a spoken word to a specific MoI3D keyboard shortcut.

Example: Saying "Line" simulates pressing the "L" key (or whichever shortcut you have configured for the Line tool);

saying "Circle" simulates the "C" key.

Limitations of this method: While voice control is convenient for quickly triggering tools or scripts, it quickly proves inadequate for precision 3D modeling.

Point placement: MoI3D requires precise clicking in 3D space or the entry of exact numerical coordinates. Voice input lacks the precision needed to target vertices or draw smooth curves on the screen.

Therefore, it works well as a supplementary method (for accessing menus or functions) but is difficult to use as a sole means of drawing.

---

Why does “Claude” need MoI?

It has access to every paper and book and bit of information Michael ever read or studied.

Why dont you just go model in Claude? You can stop, check your work, and resume and save whenever you want!

“DIY install?” Why doesnt Claude take care of that for you?

Claude could make this post for you! Why are you wasting time? Its not the future for you to waste time.

Even “Frenchy” is presenting “commands” in here now…

Let the SPAM begin…….

---

Hi Burr,

> Why does “Claude” need MoI?

I was fooling with Grok some months back, asking it to produce some dimensioned, scaled architectural models. It quickly turned into a mess, so I began asking "it" about its underlying tools and abilities. What I learned was that none of the then current AIs had integral geometry kernels though there were some efforts underway to communicate with some CAD packages (typically work being done by the CAD vendors).

At that point I shrugged and went back to using MoI as I normally do because for me, drawings without scale and precision are not useful.

I haven't visited Gabriel's github yet, but am a bit curious about how it controls MoI.

--Larry

---

Hey Larry,
what you're saying is absolutely right, and it's exactly why the MCP approach works differently.

Most commercially available AI models still have no geometry kernel, and mcp-bridge-for-moi doesn't pretend otherwise. It doesn't generate geometry at all. All the geometry is made by MoI's own kernel, in your open document, through MoI's scripting API. The AI's only job is to decide which MoI command to run and with what numbers — the same decisions you make when you type a value into a command's input field.

How it works in practice

Two pieces: a small script that sits in MoI's startup folder and connects out over a local WebSocket, and an MCP server that your AI client (Claude Code, Claude Desktop, anything that speaks MCP) launches. The server talks to the agent on one side and to MoI on the other. It listens on 127.0.0.1 only, with a token regenerated each start.

The agent gets a handful of tools. The important one runs JavaScript inside MoI, which is how it calls MoI's geometry factories — the same 110 commands the UI drives (box, loft, revolve, fillet, boolean, …). 103 of them can be driven from a script; the other 7 need an interactive viewport pick or produce nothing headless, and are documented as such. Every one of the 103 is committed with real inputs and its output checked by an automated test run.

The rest of the tools are: list the scene (id, type, whether an object is a closed solid, bounding size, document units), read your selection, set the selection or the view, render a viewport image so it can look at what it just made, and export to STEP/OBJ/STL etc.

On scale and precision specifically

- Every factory input is a number in document units. A box 3600 × 240 × 2700 mm is that, exactly, because MoI built it.
- If the open document has no unit system, modelling and export are refused with a no_units error until you pick one.
- Exports go through MoI's own translators, so a STEP out of it is a MoI STEP.

So the failure mode you hit with Grok — plausible-looking nonsense with no kernel underneath — isn't really available here. What can go wrong is different and more mundane: the agent picks the wrong command, mis-orders an operation, or misjudges a dimension it inferred rather than was given. You see it happen live in your viewport.

Cheers,
Gabriel

---

@ Frenchy Pilou
Sorry, Pilou. I misunderstood you in the first place — I thought you were talking about controlling an AI via voice commands.
I guess your solution breakdown (especially using macro tools) would work.

Cheers,
Gabriel

---

Show messages:  1  2-21  22-37