Skip to main content
Glama

immobilier

by fr.synergieloc

cao_generer_ifc

WHEN the drawing must leave as a real BIM file, openable in Revit/ArchiCAD/Solibri — not just a drawing. Draw a building scene and get an IFC4 file: real spatial hierarchy (project/site/building/storeys), each element with a real IFC GUID and a material carrying physical properties (density, thermal conductivity). Doors/windows are classified IfcDoor/IfcWindow and positioned, but no boolean opening is cut in the host wall (documented limitation). Call cao_verifier first. Same scene as cao_generer_dxf.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mursNoWalls: plan segments extruded vertically
planNo2D reference lines
boitesNoBoxes (furniture, volumes): center x,y + dims l,p,h (mm)
cerclesNo
reseauxNoPlumbing pipe runs (EF/EC/EU/EV/EP/chauffage) — used only by cao_pdf (technical plan + linear-meter quantities per type).
toituresNoRoofs — used only by cao_pdf. WITHOUT this field: a flat roof is auto-generated over the footprint of ALL walls (legacy default). WITH it: compose freely — each entry can target a subset of walls (via `murs`), letting you build an L-shaped building's roof, or add a dormer on top of a main roof.
plomberieNoSanitary fixtures (sink, WC, shower…) — used only by cao_pdf. Same positioning as electricite.
decorationNoPaint/finish per wall — used only by cao_pdf. Colors the elevations (exterior face) and the axonometric view (face auto-detected by orientation relative to the building's centroid).
ouverturesNoDoors/windows embedded in a wall — used only by cao_pdf (elevations + axonometric view), no effect on dxf/metres.
electriciteNoElectrical symbols (outlets, switches, lights…) — used only by cao_pdf (dedicated technical plan + quantities), no effect on dxf/metres/render. Position: attached to a wall (`mur`+`position`, like ouvertures) or free (`x`,`y`).

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: outputs IFC4 with real spatial hierarchy, GUIDs, physical material properties, and a documented limitation (no boolean openings). It also notes the validation prerequisite, making the tool's behavior predictable.

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?

The description is compact (about 80 words), front-loaded with the primary use case, and every sentence provides value: purpose, output details, limitation, prerequisite, and sibling relationship. No wasted words.

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?

Despite no output schema or annotations, the description covers the main output characteristics, limitations, and the required call to cao_verifier. It also links to the sibling tool cao_generer_dxf, making the tool's role in the workflow clear.

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 description coverage is 90%, so the schema already documents parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond the scene context, which is acceptable at baseline 3.

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's function: generate an IFC4 BIM file with spatial hierarchy, GUIDs, and material properties. It explicitly differentiates from siblings like cao_generer_dxf (which produces a drawing) and positions this as the BIM export tool.

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?

It specifies when to use (when a real BIM file is needed) and provides an explicit alternative ('Same scene as cao_generer_dxf') plus a prerequisite ('Call cao_verifier first'). This gives clear decision guidance.

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

All immobilier 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

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are clearly distinct by purpose (e.g., quittance_loyer vs relance_impaye, or relance_facture_client vs relance_impaye). A few pairs like bon_intervention and fiche_mission could cause confusion, but detailed descriptions help resolve ambiguity.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mix French and English, and use inconsistent patterns: some are noun-based (annonce_location, quittance_loyer), some verb-based (decide_campagne, obtenir_cle_api), and the cao_* tools use a prefix convention. Still readable but not uniform.

Tool Count2/5

41 tools is excessive for most servers, even one covering real estate and CAD. While the breadth is justified by multiple subdomains, the sheer number makes the surface hard to navigate and suggests possible over-fragmentation.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range: rental lifecycle (annonce, EDL, quittance, relance), owner reporting, artisan documents, fiscal synthesis, CAD generation and verification, outreach, and guides. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no direct tenant/property CRUD), but for a document-generation server it is quite complete.

Resources