CAD MCP Server

by 652036

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create_ellipse

Draw an ellipse in a CAD drawing by specifying center, radii, and rotation angle. Use to add elliptical geometry to technical drawings and layouts.

Instructions

Create an ellipse with radii and rotation.

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>",
      "rx": "<rx>",
      "ry": "<ry>"
    },
    "name": "create_ellipse"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cx`	Yes
`cy`	Yes
`rx`	Yes
`ry`	Yes
`unit`	No
`layer`	No
`rotation`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It doesn't disclose whether the operation is undoable, whether it requires an active layer or document, whether it works in 2D or 3D space, or what the return value is. These are important for a creation tool in a CAD environment.

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?

The single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the core action, but it is overly terse given the complexity of the tool. It earns its place by stating the essential purpose, yet it wastes no words on useful additional context.

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

Completeness1/5

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

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is far too sparse. An agent lacks information about required parameters, coordinate system, return behavior, and safety profile. For a 7-parameter creation tool, this is critically incomplete.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and none of the 7 parameters are documented. The description only alludes to 'radii' and 'rotation', but does not explain any parameter names, units, defaults, constraints (e.g., exclusiveMinimum for radii), or the purpose of optional parameters like 'layer' or 'unit'.

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 and resource ('Create an ellipse') and mentions the key controllable attributes (radii, rotation). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like create_circle or create_box, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with those alternatives.

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 such as create_circle or create_rectangle. There is no mention of prerequisites, coordinate system, or the intended context for creating an ellipse.

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

Deploy Server