Prompt & Image Guide
The quality of your prompt (for Text-to-CAD) or source image (for Image-to-CAD) is the single biggest factor in output quality. This page covers what the pipeline handles well, what language patterns produce better results, and what to avoid.
Text-to-CAD Prompt Guide
Overview
Makistry is designed to handle any prompt, vague or specific. It interprets your idea, design intent, and thinks about them like an engineer would.
More information = Follows the specific requirements and constraints
Less information = Thinks independently and creatively
Simple Framework
Three-step framework for effective prompts:
- High-level description: Describe your idea and the purpose of the design. A one-line description, problem you're trying to solve, or use cases can help guide the design in the right direction.
- Outline components: List and briefly describe the components or features in your design.
- Define constraints: Specify any dimensions, geometric requirements, or other design constraints.
Language Patterns That Produce Better Results
Be specific with dimensions — always include units:
✓ A 50×30×10mm rectangular plate
✗ A small flat plate
Name the feature type explicitly:
✓ An M5 counterbore: 8.5mm head diameter, 4.5mm deep, centered on the top face
✗ A screw hole on top
Specify the reference face or location:
✓ Two M4 through-holes on the long face, 15mm from each end, centered vertically
✗ Two holes on the side
Describe mating intent for assemblies:
✓ The lid sits on a 1.5mm step that runs around the inner perimeter of the base, with 0.15mm clearance
✗ The lid goes on the base
Use geometric vocabulary:
✓ Circular pocket, 20mm diameter, 5mm deep, centered on the top face
✗ A round dent in the top
Three Example Prompts at Different Levels of Complexity
VESA Mount Adapter
Make a 3 mm-thick adapter plate that lets a 75×75 mm VESA monitor mount attach to a 100×100 mm mount. Include 8 M4 through-holes and countersink the 75 mm pattern holes only. Add 0.7 mm chamfers.
Raspberry Pi Enclosure
Design a snap-fit enclosure for a 65 x 30 x 5 mm Raspberry Pi Zero, with ventilation slots on the top and a cutout for the micro-USB port on one side.
Spur Gear
Create a 20 mm-thick spur gear with 25 teeth, module of 2, and 10 mm-diameter central shaft hole.
Limitations
- Organic freeform surfaces: cloth, skin, terrain, splash forms, sculptural shapes
- Fluid or simulation geometry: anything that requires computational simulation to define shape
- Sub-0.1mm features: the kernel can represent them but the pipeline may not reliably produce them
- Assemblies with more than 8–10 distinct parts in
standardorpromode — switch to"assembly"mode, which parallelizes generation across parts
Image-to-CAD Source Image Guide
What Makes a Good Source Image
The image pipeline extracts edges, interprets geometry, and reconstructs a 3D B-rep model. The quality of that reconstruction depends almost entirely on how clearly the geometry is visible.
Best sources, in order of accuracy:
- Hand sketches with labeled dimensions — much faster to produce than a photo
- Orthographic photos (top, front, side) — supply multiple angles for 3D reconstruction
- Perspective product photos — geometry is estimated from visible edges
- Renders — useful when the physical part doesn't exist yet
- Dimensioned engineering drawings — dimensions are read directly, so higher likelihood of missed features or dimensions
Ideal Image Conditions
- Single part per image (or a clearly dominant part)
- Clean background — white, light grey, or contrasting solid color
- High contrast between part edges and background
- Even lighting — avoid shadows that obscure edges or create false edges
- Sharp focus throughout the image — especially at edges
- Orthographic projection preferred over perspective; angled photos require the model to estimate foreshortening
Using Multiple Images
Submit up to 3 images of the same part from different viewpoints. Pair with a prompt hint to identify each view:
image 1: part_front.png
image 2: part_side.png
image 3: part_top.png
prompt: "front view, right-side view, and top view of the same bracket"
Multi-view submissions significantly improve 3D reconstruction accuracy, particularly for parts with features that are only visible from certain angles.
Limitations
| Problem | Why it fails | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Blurry or out-of-focus image | Edge detection degrades; geometry is guessed | Use a sharper photo or a drawing instead |
| Cluttered background | The pipeline can't segment the part from the scene | Isolate on a plain background |
| Assembled product where parts occlude each other | Internal geometry is invisible and will be estimated | Photograph individual parts separately |
| Hands, rulers, packaging in frame | Confuse segmentation and scale estimation | Crop to the part only |
| Organic shapes (cloth, food, living things) | B-rep CAD can't represent these geometries | Not supported |
| Fine PCB or electronic detail | Resolution limits and component density overwhelm geometry extraction | Not supported |
| High-perspective distortion (extreme wide angle) | Geometry estimation breaks down | Use a longer focal length or a drawing |
Resolution is rarely the problem. A sharp 800×600 image of a clean part will outperform a blurry 4K photo. Clarity and contrast matter more than megapixels.
Image vs. Drawing: Behavioral Differences
| Source type | Dimension handling | Typical accuracy |
|---|---|---|
| Sketch with labels | Dimensions read from handwritten labels | High |
| Orthographic photo (no dims) | Proportions estimated from pixel ratios; scale inferred from context | High |
| Perspective photo | Foreshortening corrected; scale assumed | Medium |
| Dimensioned drawing | Dimensions read directly from annotation | Low |