Skip to main content
Glama

Revit MCP

by io.scanbimlabs

revit_export_ifc

When to use: Kick off a Model Derivative translation of a previously uploaded Revit URN into IFC (IFC2x3 Coordination View 2.0 by default) so the model can be exchanged with non-Autodesk tools (Solibri, BIMcollab, Tekla, openBIM workflows). When NOT to use: Do not use for SVF/SVF2 web viewing (that happens automatically in revit_upload), and do not call repeatedly while a prior IFC job is still inprogress — poll the manifest instead. APS scopes: data:read data:write viewables:read (Model Derivative job + manifest). Rate limits: APS default ~50 req/min per app per endpoint; Model Derivative translation jobs ~60 req/min; OSS uploads size-limited per file to 100MB for direct upload, larger via resumable. Errors: 401 APS token expired — refresh. 403 scope insufficient — add data:write. 404 URN not found — confirm model_id was translated. 409 not applicable. 429 rate limited — back off. 5xx APS upstream — retry with jitter up to 3x. Side effects: Creates a Model Derivative job and, on completion, a new IFC derivative inside the model's manifest. Safe to re-run (APS deduplicates) but each call with x-ads-force may retranslate.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
model_idYesBase64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model to export to IFC. Always begins with 'dXJu'.
include_propertiesNoWhether to include Revit property sets in the IFC output. true -> IFC2x3 Coordination View 2.0 (with psets); false -> minimal IFC2x3 geometry.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_properties / default
      Added value: +true
    • changedInput schema / properties / include_properties / description
      Previous value: -"Include property sets in IFC output"New value: +"Whether to include Revit property sets in the IFC output. true -> IFC2x3 Coordination View 2.0 (with psets); false -> minimal IFC2x3 geometry."
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_properties / examples
      Added value: +[
+  true
+]
    • changedInput schema / properties / model_id / description
      Previous value: -"Base64-encoded URN"New value: +"Base64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model to export to IFC. Always begins with 'dXJu'."
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_id / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "dXJuOmFkc2sub2JqZWN0czpvcy5vYmplY3Q6c2NhbmJpbS1yZXZpdC0xNzMxMjM0NTY3L015QnVpbGRpbmcucnZ0"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / model_id / pattern
      Added value: +"^dXJu[A-Za-z0-9_-]+$"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses side effects (creates a Model Derivative job and IFC derivative), idempotency (safe to re-run, APS deduplicates), rate limits, scopes, and error handling. This goes far beyond basic safety hints and covers operational behavior comprehensively.

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?

Although lengthy, the description is well-structured with clear labels (When to use, When NOT to use, APS scopes, Rate limits, Errors, Side effects). Every sentence provides useful, non-redundant information, and the main use case is front-loaded.

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?

Given the complexity of the Model Derivative translation process and the absence of an output schema, the description covers prerequisites (translated URN), error scenarios, rate limits, side effects, and how to monitor progress (poll manifest). It is exceptionally complete for a tool with no annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema covers both parameters with descriptions and examples (100% coverage). The tool description adds value by explaining the default IFC version (IFC2x3 Coordination View 2.0) and the effect of include_properties on output, enhancing the schema's baseline.

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 purpose: to kick off a Model Derivative translation of a Revit URN into IFC for exchange with non-Autodesk tools. It uses specific verbs and resources, and explicitly distinguishes itself from revit_upload, which handles SVF/SVF2 viewing.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including not using it for web viewing (use revit_upload) and not calling repeatedly while a prior IFC job is in progress (poll the manifest instead). It also names the alternative for SVF/SVF2.

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

All Revit MCP 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: upload ingests, get_elements/get_parameters/get_sheets/get_views retrieve different types of data, run_schedule queries tabular views, clash_detect performs spatial analysis, and export_ifc converts formats. No two tools overlap in function; even get_sheets and get_views are explicitly differentiated in their descriptions.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent revit_<verb> pattern in snake_case, with get_* for read operations and action verbs for other operations. The naming is predictable and uniform across the entire set.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and appropriately matches the server's scope of Revit model ingestion, exploration, analysis, and export. Each tool earns its place without redundancy or bloat.

Completeness3/5

The tool set covers the core lifecycle (upload, read elements/parameters/sheets/views, run schedules, clash detect, export IFC), but there is no tool to check translation status or poll the manifest, which is referenced in descriptions but not provided. This is a notable gap that can cause agents to call read tools before translation completes, leading to failures.

Resources