Gradient Dynamics: thermal and CFD simulation

Finish design draft

finish_design_draft

Idempotent

Finish or cancel the shared draft at its current sequence. Ready drafts remain inspectable and are handed to Studio's normal proposal/revision review; this never bypasses engineer approval.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "expected_sequence": "<expected_sequence>",
      "draft_id": "<draft_id>"
    },
    "name": "finish_design_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`state`	No	ready
`draft_id`	Yes
`expected_sequence`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the mutation, idempotency, and non-destructive profile, so the description's added value is the workflow consequence: ready drafts stay inspectable and route into Studio's normal proposal/revision review rather than bypassing engineer approval. That is genuine context an agent cannot get from the annotations, though it is silent on sequence-mismatch behavior and on what cancellation actually does to the draft.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the downstream consequence. No filler and nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema covers return values and annotations cover the safety profile, so the remaining burden is small. Still, for a state-transition tool with zero schema descriptions, missing conflict/error semantics and cancellation effects leave a noticeable gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it partly does: 'finish or cancel' maps to the state enum and 'at its current sequence' explains expected_sequence as the draft's current version. It still does not state that a mismatched expected_sequence is rejected, nor clarify draft_id beyond 'the shared draft.'

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb pair (finish/cancel) and the exact resource (the shared draft), plus the scoping qualifier 'at its current sequence.' It is clear enough to distinguish from read siblings like get_design_draft, though it never names an alternative tool explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage context is implied: you call this when a draft has reached the sequence you intend to commit or abandon. It explains the downstream consequence for 'ready' drafts but gives no explicit when-not guidance, no preconditions, and no mention of what happens to a cancelled draft.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Gradient Dynamics: thermal and CFD simulation tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?