Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CAD MCP Server

CAD MCP Server

by 652036
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

create_circle

Draw a circle in a CAD drawing by specifying center coordinates, radius, unit, and optional layer.

Instructions

Create a circle with centre (cx,cy) and radius. Lengths use unit (default mm).

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": {
      "cx": "<cx>",
      "cy": "<cy>",
      "radius": "<radius>"
    },
    "name": "create_circle"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cxYes
cyYes
unitNo
layerNo
radiusYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states that lengths use the given unit with mm default, which is useful, but says nothing about whether the circle is added to the current layer, whether it can be undone, or what constraints apply (e.g., radius must be > 0).

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?

One efficient sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and adds the unit default as a secondary clause. No filler.

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 creation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters (three required), the description is materially incomplete. It omits layer behavior, validation rules (radius > 0), and whether the circle is a 2D entity (given siblings like create_sphere and create_cylinder, clarity on dimensionality matters).

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the unit default (mm) and that lengths use that unit, which adds meaning beyond the enum schema, but it doesn't mention the exclusiveMinimum constraint on radius, the optional layer parameter, or how cx/cy are interpreted (absolute vs relative).

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?

States a specific verb (Create) and resource (circle) with the geometric parameters named. Doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like create_ellipse or create_polygon, but the resource is specific enough that an agent can distinguish it.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (create_ellipse for ovals, create_polygon for polygons, or create_arc for partial curves). Only an implicit default-value statement about units.

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