Gradient Dynamics: thermal and CFD simulation

Submit design study

submit_study

Idempotent

Run a parameter sweep or design study: submit several geometry, mesh or simulation cases at once with one combined estimate and one budget check. Either every case is admitted or none is. Not for a single run (use create_geometry, create_mesh or run_simulation). Pass plan_geometry_study's cases (request and idempotency_key each) with kind=geometry, or your own mesh or simulation sweep, all in one project. max_concurrent (default 2) caps how many run at once; each case becomes its own job with its own billing, and notify_url is notified as each finishes. A refusal (HTTP 402) reports the combined estimate and submits nothing. Keep each case's idempotency_key to retry safely.

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": {
      "kind": "<kind>",
      "study_id": "<study_id>",
      "cases": "<cases>"
    },
    "name": "submit_study"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`kind`	Yes
`cases`	Yes
`study_id`	Yes
`notify_url`	No	Public HTTPS URL notified as each child finishes.
`max_concurrent`	No	Most children of this study that run at once (plan limits still apply).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: all-or-nothing admission, per-case jobs with their own billing, per-case notify_url callbacks, and an HTTP 402 refusal path that reports the combined estimate and submits nothing. The annotations already declare idempotency and non-destructiveness, and the description reinforces retry safety via idempotency_key. It stops short of describing limits applied per study beyond max_concurrent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose and the sibling exclusion before the operational detail, with each sentence carrying distinct information (admission semantics, alternatives, case sources, concurrency, billing, callback, failure mode, retry). It is dense and runs long, but there is no filler.

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?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with an output schema and meaningful annotations, the description covers admission semantics, cost checking, failure behavior, concurrency, and callbacks. The main residual gap is what a study_id represents and whether it must pre-exist or is caller-chosen.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With schema coverage at 40%, the description does most of the heavy lifting: it explains max_concurrent's capping role and default, notify_url's per-finished-child notification, and the structure of each case (request plus idempotency_key sourced from plan_geometry_study). study_id is only implied by "all in one project" and is never defined, and the kind enum values are left to 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 ("Run a parameter sweep or design study: submit several geometry, mesh or simulation cases at once") and immediately names the siblings it is not for (create_geometry, create_mesh, run_simulation). An agent can distinguish it from any single-run tool without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use (multiple cases at once, one combined estimate and budget check), explicit when-not ("Not for a single run (use create_geometry, create_mesh or run_simulation)"), and names the upstream feeder plan_geometry_study plus the kind=geometry condition for consuming its output.

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?