Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

kernelCAD

by com.kernelcad
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get FEA Summary

fea_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when you need a structural check's context without paying for a solve. Read-only: returns the stored summary of a previous run_fea (pass the same output_dir), whether the CalculiX + gmsh toolchain is available on this machine (with the install command when it is not; run_fea then uses its in-process voxel solver — toolchain.default_solver says which), and the FEA material table with real E / Poisson / yield numbers so a grade is chosen against data rather than from memory. Never meshes, solves, or writes.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
output_dirNoDirectory a previous run_fea wrote to; omit for toolchain status + material table only.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedOutput schema / properties
      Removed value: -{
-  "error": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "errorCode": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "material_names": {
-    "description": "Accepted material grade names.",
-    "items": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "materials": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "description": "Named grade -> { E (MPa), nu, yield (MPa) }.",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "ok": {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  "summary": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "description": "Stored summary of a previous run_fea in output_dir, when present.",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "toolchain": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "description": "{ available, ccx?, gmshVersion?, missing[], hint? } — whether a study can run here and how to fix it if not.",
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}
    • removedOutput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "ok",
-  "toolchain",
-  "materials",
-  "material_names"
-]
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces rather than contradicts them with 'Never meshes, solves, or writes.' It adds genuine context beyond annotations: toolchain availability reporting, the install command when absent, fallback to the in-process voxel solver, and the material table with real E/Poisson/yield values.

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?

Single dense paragraph, front-loaded with the when-to-use clause, and every sentence carries information. It is somewhat run-on with stacked parentheticals (solver fallback, toolchain.default_solver, material fields), which costs a bit of scannability.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-optional-parameter read tool with readOnly annotations and an output schema, this is complete: it covers purpose, prerequisite (prior run_fea output_dir), fallback behavior, and the content of the returned material table. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already explains omitting output_dir, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the link to run_fea ('pass the same output_dir') and states what the omit path returns (toolchain status + material table), which meaningfully clarifies parameter effect.

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+resource (returns the stored FEA summary) and immediately pins its scope: context for a structural check without a solve. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling run_fea, which it names and contrasts with.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('when you need a structural check's context without paying for a solve') and points to run_fea as the alternative that produces the output_dir it consumes. The 'pass the same output_dir' instruction ties usage to the sibling workflow directly.

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

All kernelCAD toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources