Skip to main content
Glama

kernelcad

by com.kernelcad

Remove Feature

remove_feature
Destructive

Use this when you need to remove a feature line from a script. Remove a single line from a kernelCAD script identified by a substring match. Returns the modified code plus diagnostics from re-evaluating. Refuses to remove the line containing the return statement. Side-effect-free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYesThe .kcad.ts source code.
matchYesA substring that uniquely identifies the line to remove (e.g. `const hole = cylinder(5,`).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesWhether the edit applied and re-evaluated cleanly.
errorNoFailure message (present when ok is false).
new_codeNoModified .kcad.ts source (present on success). Caller persists it.
diagnosticsNoDiagnostics from re-evaluating the modified source.
binding_nameNoJS const name bound to the new construct (when one was created).

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

The description claims 'Side-effect-free,' but annotations set destructiveHint=true, indicating the tool has side effects (modifying code). This contradiction misleads about safety; the description does not clarify what side effects occur.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with 'Use this when...', no wasted words. All information is essential and well-ordered.

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?

Given the output schema and annotations, the description covers key behavior: returns modified code and diagnostics, refuses to remove return line. Missing details on match uniqueness failure, but overall sufficient.

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 100% and already includes descriptions for both parameters. The description adds only a usage context but no new semantic meaning beyond the schema examples.

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?

The description clearly states the tool removes a feature line from a script, specifying the verb (remove) and resource (feature line). It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_feature by its purpose.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explicitly says 'Use this when you need to remove a feature line from a script,' providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, though siblings imply absence of add-like behavior.

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
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are mostly distinct, with clear descriptions for each. However, there is some potential overlap between inspection tools like 'inspect' and 'mesh_summary', and between rendering tools 'render_preview' and 'get_latest_render', which could cause minor confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern, making it predictable for an agent to infer functionality.

Tool Count2/5

44 tools is significantly higher than the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the domain is complex, the count feels excessive and could overwhelm an agent.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers an extensive range of CAD operations including creation, inspection, rendering, export, and verification. Minor gaps exist, such as direct sketch editing tools, but overall it is comprehensive.

Resources