A Grasshopper definition needs a handover
Names, units, examples and failure messages determine whether another designer can continue a useful script.
A facade definition can work on its author’s model and still be difficult for a colleague to use. Inputs are scattered, a unit is assumed and a plugin version is undocumented. Sharing the file is only the beginning of the handover.
Explain the working contract
We would keep a short note beside a shared definition: its task, expected geometry, units, permitted parameter ranges and dependencies. Include a small input file and an example output. Use names that describe design decisions, such as bay width or edge clearance.
The example should reveal where the method stops applying. A component that requires a planar surface should say so. Missing input, a valid empty result and a failed operation should be distinguishable.
Test it with another designer
- Ask a colleague to open the example in the intended Rhino and plugin versions.
- Have them change one input without guidance from the author.
- Compare the result with the expected behavior and record unclear steps.
A readable canvas helps, but the handover also depends on the assumptions that sit outside it. Explain which dimensions are fixed by the project and which a designer may explore.
Maintain the useful method
Our work on FraktalMCP and Falcon raises the same question for AI assistance: what operation is permitted, and how will its result be checked? Explicit inputs and review examples help both a person and an assistant.
Not every script needs a separate application. A named owner, a versioned example and a concise usage note can make a useful definition much easier to continue.