Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fusion-cad-ai

fusion-cad-ai

by 5nail000
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python

save_snapshot

Idempotent

Record a named snapshot of expressions, timeline marker, and metrics to track model state and support verification in Autodesk Fusion.

Instructions

Снимок выражений, маркера таймлайна и метрик.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "save_snapshot"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv2.0.0

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the scope of captured data and says nothing about overwrite semantics for an existing 'name', permissions, or session requirements, so it contributes little beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is a single short sentence with no padding, but it is an incomplete fragment rather than a front-loaded statement of purpose and behavior. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a write tool with no output schema and an undocumented parameter, the description omits the action verb, the parameter meaning, and any usage context. An agent would know what data is captured but not how to invoke it correctly or when.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The single required parameter 'name' has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it, so its meaning (snapshot identifier, uniqueness, overwrite behavior) is left undocumented in both places. With low coverage the description was expected to compensate and does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

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

The fragment names the captured content (expressions, timeline marker, metrics) which implies a snapshot write, but it is a noun phrase with no verb and relies on the tool name 'save_snapshot' to convey the action. It loosely distinguishes from the sibling 'restore_snapshot', but never states the saving action explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to save a snapshot versus restoring one, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., an active design/session), and no reference to the sibling 'restore_snapshot' as the counterpart operation. The agent must infer usage entirely.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools