Skip to main content
Glama

Revit MCP

by io.scanbimlabs

revit_get_views

When to use: Return every view (both 2D — floor plans, ceiling plans, elevations, sections, sheets — and 3D — default {3D}, perspective views, isometric views) in the translated Revit model, including each view's GUID, name, role, and whether it is the master view. When NOT to use: Do not use when you only want drawing sheets (use revit_get_sheets) or element data inside a view (use revit_get_elements / revit_run_schedule). APS scopes: data:read viewables:read (Model Derivative metadata + object tree). 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 viewables:read. 404 URN not found — check model_id. 429 rate limited — back off. 5xx APS upstream — retry with jitter. Side effects: Read-only. Idempotent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
model_idYesBase64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model whose views you want to list. Always begins with 'dXJu'.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / model_id / description
      Previous value: -"Base64-encoded URN"New value: +"Base64url-encoded URN of the translated Revit model whose views you want to list. 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

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden and excels: it discloses APS scopes needed, rate limits, error codes with remediation, and explicitly states 'Read-only. Idempotent.' This far exceeds minimal behavioral disclosure.

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 well-structured with clear labels and front-loads the most critical usage info. However, it includes some generic APS/OSS rate-limit details not directly relevant to this tool, making it slightly longer than necessary without harming clarity.

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 lack of an output schema, the description adequately covers return value structure, error handling, and side effects. It leaves no major gaps for a read-only list operation, making it highly complete.

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?

The schema already provides thorough documentation for model_id (base64url URN, pattern, example, description). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond stating the model is translated. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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 returns every 2D and 3D view from a translated Revit model, listing specific view types and output fields (GUID, name, role, master view status). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like revit_get_sheets.

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' sections, naming specific alternatives (revit_get_sheets, revit_get_elements, revit_run_schedule) and conditions for exclusion. This is exemplary usage guidance.

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