kernelCAD

Solve Mates

solve_mates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when you need to solve the mate graph and get part poses. Run the v0.6 mate-graph solver on the active assembly. Returns { status, poses, iterations? } where each pose is a serialized Transform ({ translation, rotateAxis, rotateDeg }). Optional poses overrides mate pose values by mate name.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`poses`	No	Optional numeric pose overrides keyed by mate name.
`assembly`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 11, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties

Removed value: -{
-  "error": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "errorCode": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "errorHint": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "iterations": {
-    "description": "Solver iteration count (success).",
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  "ok": {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  "poses": {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "description": "Solved part poses keyed by mate; each a serialized Transform (success).",
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "status": {
-    "description": "Solver status (success).",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "ok"
-]
```

Changed1 schema field changedJun 15, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "errorCode": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "errorHint": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "iterations": {
+      "description": "Solver iteration count (success).",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "poses": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Solved part poses keyed by mate; each a serialized Transform (success).",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Solver status (success).",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 25, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower; the description adds real value by disclosing solver version (v0.6), the return shape { status, poses, iterations? }, and that pose overrides are applied by mate name. These are behavioral details not present in annotations.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger, then solver behavior, then return contract. Zero waste 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?

Output schema exists, yet the description still usefully summarizes the return contract and override semantics. The only notable gap is the undocumented 'assembly' parameter; otherwise complete for a 2-param tool whose safety is covered by annotations.

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 50%: 'poses' is documented in both schema and description (override by mate name adds slight clarity), but 'assembly' has no schema description and is not explained in the description either. Baseline 3 for partial coverage with the description doing only marginal extra work.

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?

States a specific verb ('solve the mate graph') and outcome ('get part poses') on the active assembly, which clearly separates it from sibling solve_sketch. Clear what it does, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling it differs from.

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?

'Use this when you need to solve the mate graph and get part poses' gives an implied usage condition but no explicit when-not, prerequisites, or alternative (e.g., solve_sketch vs solve_mates). Usage is inferable but not guided.

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

All kernelCAD tools Inspect

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.