Maglev Parts

Check manufacturability (DFM)

check_manufacturability

Use this after uploading CAD files and before quoting, when the user asks whether a part can be made, wants a DFM (design for manufacturing) review, or asks what to change. Sends each uploaded file to the design check of a shop that makes its process (CNC machining, sheet metal, injection molding, wire harness) and returns ok, blockers and warnings per file plus ready_to_quote. The user's CAD file goes to that outside shop. Fix blockers before calling get_quotes. Requires a Maglev API key.

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": {
      "file_ids": "<file_ids>"
    },
    "name": "check_manufacturability"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`options`	No	Optional per-file options: { file_id: { material, finish, tolerance_mm, wall_mm, draft_deg, speed } }. finish: CNC standard\|anodized\|polished\|bead_blasted, sheet metal as_cut\|deburred\|anodized\|powder_coat. Each offer reports finish_applied; shops that ignore an option say so.
`file_ids`	Yes	file_id values returned by the upload commands from upload_cad_for_quote
`processes`	No	Optional per-file process override: { file_id: process }

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say this is a non-read-only open-world call. The description adds the facts an agent actually needs: the user's CAD file is sent to a third-party shop, an API key is required, which processes are covered, and that blockers must be resolved before quoting. That is meaningful disclosure well beyond the structured hints.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the trigger condition and ending with the auth prerequisite; nothing is padded. The phrase 'a shop that makes its process' is slightly awkward but still conveys per-process routing.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description names the return fields (ok, blockers, warnings, ready_to_quote) and flags the external data transfer and API-key requirement. For a nested-object, open-world tool this covers everything an agent needs before invoking it.

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%, so file_ids, options, and processes are already documented in detail. The description only loosely gestures at the process set (CNC machining, sheet metal, injection molding, wire harness) without explaining the per-file override or option semantics, so it adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: it sends each uploaded file to an outside shop's design check and returns ok, blockers, warnings per file, plus ready_to_quote. The scope and return shape distinguish it cleanly from upload_cad_for_quote and get_quotes.

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 trigger conditions (after upload, before quoting, when the user asks if a part can be made or wants a DFM review) and an explicit sequencing rule: fix blockers before calling get_quotes. Both when-to-use and the handoff to the alternative are spelled out.

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

All Maglev Parts 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?