It would be great if you could create an MCP interface for Shapr3D so that I could control it and, perhaps, create models using AI tools, such as Claude. It would be helpful to strart a project by describing it to an AI agent. Once the basics are built I could then refine it manually.
Couldn’t agree more. This would be an incredibly valuable service to the community. Also very much in line with Shaper3Ds brand as cutting edge software.
Bump any news on that?
Fusion 360 has already an MCP interface.
Bump. Any chance to get this feature?
Any update on MCP access?
I am trying to switch from onshape to Shapr3d and having an MCP server would greatly help in this regard. Due to the lack of one here, I’ve starting moving to Fusion instead.
Worth noting that both FreeCad and Blender already have MCP servers (which appear to work incredibly well with the latest models like Opus 5.0).
I don’t really want to abandon Shapr3d - I really like the software… but stuff like this can literally 100x productivity so the absence of it in Shaper3d is one of the things that could push me over the dark side.
Shockingly this is not getting attention. This is the single most important thing you can do right now. Literally this software will fail is you do not. In fact I just canceled. Moving back to FreeCad.
I am curious what you would use MCP for in this context.
That’s easy - I’d use Claude to describe, in great detail, an object I’d like to make. Some of the things I design have very specific and pre-defined measurements. But, that would also allow me, for example, to ask Claude to build something using a McMaster Carr part. The opprtunities are limitless, once the tool is in place. I’d hope Shapr3D can get going. They appear to be loosing the feature race here and missing out lots of very important features. Shapr3D felt great several years ago. Now it seems, at least to me, burdensome. Though, I’m still sticking with it.
Shapr3d Folks might be working on AI modeling something.
Yes, I think Neumann might be what you are looking for. This is a GREAT video that talks about the complexity of what you are asking for:
The content from Istavan got me going down this rabbit hole, and I have been learning a lot. I need to make a new video on the concept of predicates that he described. It is very powerful and is working really well now in my prototype
I have a rust based kernel that interops with parasolids that I wrote. It produces results very close to the direct parasolid version (almost always 0 ULP differences and fixing everything that is not exact matches). I was trying to decide if adding an MCP interface to it would be helpful in some way. So that is why I was wondering about how you see MCP being used with Shapr. I think it would be pretty easy to do something that “interops” with Shapr since it’s project files are x_t internally. Sort of a stop gap like my old text tool was until this is more built-in.
But also, I am not sure it is as easy as it first seems, particularly with a B-rep backend.
Currently Freecad has MCP, Onshape has MCP, Blender has MCP and Rhino MCP.
Onshape is touting their users that it can create their own featurescript. I connected MCP to everyone of those software. What I found useful, is not feeding in Picture to Generate CAD model, but using it to write geonode in blender, grasshoper in Rhiono and make featurescript in Onshape.
In onshape I feed a picture of a human stick figure and asked it to make it parametric, that did work but still looked like crap. They are more touting this scenario Text - Code - CAD.
Definitely a killer new feature. Looking at what other CAD software do with AI is astounding. I love shapr3D, please guys, support MCP!
Any update ? You’re starting to fall behind the competition…
Might be an unpopular opinion in this specific thread, but I don’t want my CAD experience slopified. I am actually very happy Shapr3D hasn’t integrated AI, especially since every other piece of software I use is trying to force-feed it to me right now.
Seeing people attack the devs and say the software will fail without MCP just proves exactly why it shouldn’t be added.
Generative AI fundamentally undermines human creativity. Beyond that, it’s a known contributor to a worldwide literacy and critical thinking crisis, it’s a massive source of pollution, and it is a complete intellectual property nightmare because these models are trained on stolen data.
Whatever decision the devs make, some segment of the user base is going to leave. But if you ask me, Shapr is much better off keeping the users who actually want to put the work in, rather than catering to people who want to contract out their thinking to an algorithm.
and just to note I have extensively tested and used local ai models and I am very aware of the capability of both frontier models and local models so don’t come after me saying I don’t know anything about GenAI
Yes, I suspect it will be unpopular. Sorry you’ve had such a poor experience with AI. It’s a wonderful tool for me, and I’d love help with some of the drudgery of 3D modeling. Shapr3D is good, but not great. It has an overly complex UI and some functions are ridiculously complex to perform, and many are simply missing. Seems like the development rhythm that brought us the platform has long since been extinguished, replaced by a slow drip of vanity features. So, I continue to hope MCP support arrives soon. I’m exploring other tools now simply because of this missing capability.
It is, I think, the question of our time.
Do we allow our professional knowledge and skill set atrophy under the tsunami of effortless fast results?
In many ways it’s a double edged sword for software developers. Creating automated software, able to self repair and develop. Eventually the technology could become so advanced that individual users can create software 100% suited to their individual needs, with minimal effort and no subscription fees.
Skill, craft, mastery are terms we associated with human toil.
Elon Musk spouts a doctrine of historic replacement of laborious tasks by machines, citing factories full of seamstresses and office buildings full of bankers using the abacus as a tiresome past.
Arguably the human motivation system has a deeply routed trojan horse; it wants the greatest results for the least effort.
I personally revere the skilled practitioner or artisan. Go to a craft fair and see the woodworking creations, visit a gallery and allow your mind to be drawn into a shared experience. Surely the wonder extends beyond the artefact itself.
There are designs posted here that drive me to do better, learn, master. On the contrary I have never been inspired to improve through looking at AI generated art or media.
Remove the creator’s story from the creation and slowly but surely we will dissolve the very essence of humanity.
Having AI integration doesn’t mean anyone is forced to use it. However, there’s no denying that implementing MCP would first require developing some kind of API. And such an API would be 1000% useful on its own. So personally, I’m all for it.
I’ve already asked the developers in the past about adding some form of scripting and conditional logic to Shapr3D. Even without complex scripts, this would be incredibly useful for things like repeating certain actions N times or executing an action only when a specific condition is met. Back then, I was told that they had no plans to implement anything like that.
So if the push for AI integration ends up bringing this kind of functionality to Shapr3D, I’ll be absolutely thrilled.
I completely understand your concerns about the current state of GenAI, but there is a fundamental technical misconception here about what MCP actually is.
MCP (Model Context Protocol) is not an “AI integration.” It is not an LLM, and it doesn’t generate any “slop.”
At its core, MCP is simply a standardized, scriptable API protocol, a secure bridge that allows applications to expose their data and tools in a structured way. Yes, you can connect an AI agent to an MCP server, but you can just as easily connect a standard Python script, a local database, or a deterministic automation tool.
If Shapr3D implemented an MCP server, it wouldn’t mean forcing generative AI into the software. It would simply mean providing a modern API. For power users and engineers, this opens up massive capabilities like:
- Automating repetitive tasks (batch exports, renaming parts).
- Linking CAD dimensions directly to an external BOM (Bill of Materials) or ERP system.
- Writing local, deterministic scripts to validate model constraints.
Adding MCP doesn’t take away human creativity; it just gives users a standardized way to build custom automations and connect Shapr3D to the rest of their workflow.