Retrieve exact millimeter bounding boxes, locations, rotations, and level elevations for Revit elements to support precise model analysis and coordination.
Retrieves high-precision geometric summary (exact mm bounding box, location, rotation, level elevation) for elements.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| port | No | ||
| doc_name | No | ||
| element_ids | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Retrieves' implies a read operation, but it does not state whether this requires an active document, user permissions, or whether any side effects occur. The returned field details are useful but overlap with the output schema.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the core purpose and key output details efficiently.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The output schema exists, so return value details need not be fully explained. However, with no annotations and no parameter descriptions in either the schema or the description, an agent lacks enough context about required document/port handling and optional element_ids behavior to invoke the tool confidently.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0% for all three parameters (port, doc_name, element_ids). The description says 'for elements' but never names or explains element_ids, doc_name, or port, so it does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb (Retrieves) and resource (geometric summary for elements) and enumerates the returned geometric details. It is clear enough to distinguish from sibling tools like selection or screenshot tools, but does not explicitly differentiate itself from all siblings.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The name and description imply a read operation, but the agent is left to infer the appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.