Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
comsol-mcp

comsol-mcp

by Ching-Chiang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

delete_feature

Remove a specific geometry feature from a server-side COMSOL model by specifying component, geometry, and tag.

Instructions

Delete a geometry feature from the selected server-side 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": {
      "component": "<component>",
      "geometry": "<geometry>",
      "tag": "<tag>"
    },
    "name": "delete_feature"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
componentYes
geometryYes
tagYes
run_geometryNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Delete' but omits details like reversibility, side effects, required state, or impact of the 'run_geometry' parameter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

While a single sentence is concise, it omits essential parameter details, making it inadequate for a tool with 4 parameters and a complex operation.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, presence of an output schema not described, and 4 undocumented parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not enable correct invocation.

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%, yet the description adds no explanation for any of the 4 parameters (component, geometry, tag, run_geometry). The agent gains no insight beyond raw names.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('geometry feature') with context ('from the selected server-side model'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_feature and update_feature.

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 (e.g., run_feature, update_feature). No conditions, prerequisites, or when-not advice provided.

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