Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CAD MCP Server

CAD MCP Server

by 652036
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

set_layer_locked

Lock or unlock a drawing layer to prevent unintended edits or re-enable changes.

Instructions

Set whether a layer is locked against editing.

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>",
      "locked": "<locked>"
    },
    "name": "set_layer_locked"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
lockedYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and reveals the mutation is a toggle of the 'locked' attribute. However it omits what locking prevents (editing vs selection vs deletion), whether it's reversible, whether it requires the layer to be empty, and permission requirements. Adequate but thin for a mutation tool.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste. Efficient, though possibly under-specified rather than genuinely concise.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, 0% schema coverage on both params, and a mutation operation. The description should clarify the locked semantics and prerequisites but does not, leaving significant gaps for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the schema documents neither parameter (name, locked). The description mentions 'layer' and 'locked' implicitly, partially decoding params, but gives no format for name or semantics of the boolean. Falls short of compensating for the coverage gap.

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 ('set') and resource ('layer locked'). Clear what modifies what, though not aggressively differentiated from siblings like set_layer_visible or set_entity_layer beyond the 'locked' attribute. Adequate but not exceptionally sharp.

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 vs set_layer_visible or set_entity_layer, no prerequisites stated, no mention of alternatives. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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