ANSYS MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Import Mechanical Geometry

mechanical_import

Load an existing geometry file into the active Mechanical model, enabling simulation setup from saved or external CAD data.

Instructions

Import an existing geometry file into the active Mechanical model.

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": {
      "file_path": "<file_path>"
    },
    "name": "mechanical_import"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`file_path`	Yes	Absolute or working-directory-relative file path

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`ok`	Yes
`data`	No
`tool`	Yes
`error`	No
`message`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Aug 14, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate that the tool is not read-only, not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds that it targets the 'active Mechanical model', implying a prerequisite state. However, it does not disclose what happens on file-not-found, file-format compatibility, or whether repeated imports replace existing geometry, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no redundant words. It immediately states the action and target, earning the highest score for conciseness and structure.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential 'what' and 'where'. It could be more complete by mentioning supported file types or that the Mechanical model must be active, but the output schema and annotations reduce the burden.

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?

The input schema has one parameter, file_path, with a description already covering meaning (absolute or relative path). With 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Import' and clearly identifies the resource: 'existing geometry file' and the destination: 'active Mechanical model'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like geometry_import_file, which target the geometry editor rather than the Mechanical model.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'into the active Mechanical model' indicates the intended context and implies that this tool is for transferring geometry into a Mechanical simulation setup, as opposed to geometry creation or other operations. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but for a single-purpose import tool this is sufficient.

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