Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TIA Portal MCP Server

TIA Portal MCP Server

by BJM1122
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Build TIA Reference Index

tia_build_reference_index
Idempotent

Builds or refreshes a project-neutral symbol, reference, and data-flow cache from a Simatic ML export without modifying the TIA project or PLC; writes only under _codex_index.

Instructions

Build or refresh a persistent project-neutral symbol definition, read/write reference, and data-flow cache from an existing Simatic ML export. It writes only under the export's _codex_index folder and never changes the TIA project or PLC.

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": {
      "exportDir": "<exportDir>"
    },
    "name": "tia_build_reference_index"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
exportDirYes
forceRebuildNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.29.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false with idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is set. The description adds real value beyond that: it confines writes to the export's _codex_index folder and guarantees the TIA project and PLC are untouched, which is exactly the reassurance an agent needs before running a non-read-only tool. It does not cover cost, runtime, or failure modes.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and target, followed by the write-scope guarantee. The middle clause listing three cache contents is slightly dense but each item is informative rather than filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what is produced, where it is written, and that the source project is untouched. The main omissions are the meaning of forceRebuild and any indication of what the tool returns on success, which an agent would need to chain follow-up calls.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it only partially does: 'from an existing Simatic ML export' implies that exportDir points at that export. The forceRebuild flag is never mentioned, despite 'build or refresh' hinting at the distinction without clarifying what happens to an existing cache when it is false.

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?

The description names a specific verb pair (build/refresh) and a concrete resource: a symbol-definition, cross-reference, and data-flow cache derived from a Simatic ML export. It also states the write location (_codex_index), which separates it from export-producing or index-listing siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative tool, but the input and output are unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The precondition 'from an existing Simatic ML export' implies when the tool applies, and 'build or refresh' hints at repeated invocation. However, there is no explicit statement of when not to use it, nor which sibling to prefer when an index already exists or when the agent only wants to read one.

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