Gradient Dynamics: thermal and CFD simulation

Plan design study

plan_geometry_study

Read-onlyIdempotent

Validate up to 16 explicit template parameter variants and assign stable child submission keys. Returns a plan only: no jobs are launched. Submit the chosen cases together with submit_study (one budget check), or one at a time with create_geometry.

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": {
      "request": "<request>",
      "variants": "<variants>",
      "study_id": "<study_id>"
    },
    "name": "plan_geometry_study"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`request`	Yes
`study_id`	Yes
`variants`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'Returns a plan only: no jobs are launched' — no contradiction. It adds genuine context beyond the annotations: the 16-variant cap, the stable key assignment that enables later submission, and the budget-check implication. It does not say how invalid or partially invalid variants are reported, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the capability and immediately followed by the critical 'plan only, no jobs' caveat and the two next-step routes. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool has an output schema, so return shape need not be explained, and the description covers purpose, side-effect freedom, and follow-up paths. It is nearly complete; the remaining gap is the undocumented study_id semantics and failure behavior for rejected variants.

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?

Top-level schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It explains the variants array (explicit cases, up to 16) and the meaning of the returned child keys, but says nothing about study_id — presumably a caller-supplied identity or idempotency handle — or about the request object, whose nested descriptions live only in the schema.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource: validate up to 16 explicit template parameter variants and assign stable child submission keys, returning a plan rather than launching jobs. That framing is clearly distinct from submit_study (batch execution) and create_geometry (single execution) named in the same sentence.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit routing: use submit_study to submit chosen cases together under one budget check, or create_geometry to submit them one at a time. The when-not is also stated implicitly but clearly — this tool never launches jobs, so it must be paired with one of those two.

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?