Skip to main content
Glama

immobilier

by fr.synergieloc
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

cao_valider_ifc

WHEN you need to check an IFC scene without a buildingSMART account. Same scene as cao_generer_ifc. Returns {ok, schema_ifc4, regles, problemes}: IFC4 schema + EXPRESS rules, millimetre units, material layers on every IfcWallStandardCase, named IfcSpace, thermal conductivity in Pset_MaterialThermal, every element in a storey.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mursNoWalls: plan segments extruded vertically. Every coordinate in this whole scene is in MILLIMETRES, in a single plan frame whose origin you choose — X to the right, Y upward, Z up from the floor. Keep one consistent origin across murs/boites/plan: the generators never recentre anything for you.
planNo2D reference lines — drawn flat, never extruded and never counted in the quantities. Use them for axes, plot limits or setting-out marks.
boitesNoBoxes (furniture, volumes): a rectangular block placed by its CENTRE, not by a corner. Millimetres, same frame as murs[].
georefNoOptional Lambert-93 (EPSG:2154) false origin for IfcMapConversion. Local millimetres are scaled by 0.001 to CRS metres. Do not invent coordinates: omit est/nord if unknown (origin stays 0). orientation is the angle in degrees of project X from map East, counterclockwise.
cerclesNoCircles on the 2D plan, alongside plan[] lines: each has a centre and a radius, in the same unit as the plan. Use for round shapes a polyline would render badly — fillets, posts, manholes.
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`).
compositionsNoNamed wall/slab layer sets declared by the project. A key that matches an inferred kind (mur_exterieur, refend, cloison, plancher, toiture) or murs[].composition drops the Hypothese flag. Each value is {libelle, couches: [{cle, epaisseur?}]}. cle: enduit, bloc_beton, isolant, ba13, ossature, enduit_platre, beton_arme, tuile, charpente, etancheite. Omit epaisseur on the load-bearing layer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / murs / items / properties / existant
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: true for a wall of the EXISTING building when the scene is an extension. cao_permis then counts as created only what the works add.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / plomberie / items / properties / type / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "baignoire",
-  "chauffe_eau",
-  "compteur_eau",
-  "douche",
-  "evier",
-  "lavabo",
-  "radiateur",
-  "wc"
-]New value: +[
+  "baignoire",
+  "chauffe_eau",
+  "compteur_eau",
+  "douche",
+  "evier",
+  "lavabo",
+  "module_hydraulique",
+  "pac_exterieure",
+  "radiateur",
+  "wc"
+]
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the return structure ({ok, schema_ifc4, regles, problemes}) and enumerates the validation rules (IFC4 schema, EXPRESS rules, material layers, named spaces, thermal conductivity, storey assignment). This is substantive behavioral detail, though it omits side-effect notes (e.g., read-only) and error handling; still, the core behavior is well described.

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?

The description is two sentences, with the key condition ('WHEN...') front-loaded. The second sentence packs a long list of validation specifics but remains readable. It is efficient with no filler, though the density could be slightly restructured for scannability.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (12 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description provides a high-level overview and the return shape, which is helpful. However, it does not explain the meaning of the output fields (e.g., what 'problemes' contains), prerequisites beyond the account, or how the validation relates to other tools. The schema carries parameter details, but for a validation tool the description could be more exhaustive.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all 12 parameters in detail. The description adds only a cross-reference to cao_generer_ifc ('Same scene') and restates the output, but does not enhance understanding of any specific parameter 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.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('check an IFC scene') and resource, and distinguishes it from cao_generer_ifc by noting 'Same scene as cao_generer_ifc' and the condition 'without a buildingSMART account'. It is clear about the operation, but it does not explicitly differentiate from other validation siblings like cao_verifier or cao_bcf_ifc, so a 4 rather than 5.

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?

The description gives a clear when-condition ('WHEN you need to check an IFC scene without a buildingSMART account') and hints that the input matches cao_generer_ifc. However, it does not name any alternative tools for the account-required case, nor does it state when NOT to use this tool, so the guidance is partial rather than explicit.

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
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