Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
comsol-mcp

comsol-mcp

by Ching-Chiang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

model_load

Load an MPH file on the COMSOL server and set it as the active model for collaborative modeling.

Instructions

Load an MPH file on the connected COMSOL server and select it as current.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "model_load"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwrites current model), error handling (file not found, invalid format), or any constraints (file size, server state). Only states the basic function.

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?

Single sentence front-loaded with action, no unnecessary words. Efficient and clear.

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?

Despite having an output schema (unknown content), the description omits return value details, prerequisites (server connection), and behavioral context needed for a load operation. Incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It mentions 'MPH file' which adds file type context to the 'path' parameter, but does not specify path format, required extension, or allowed values beyond the schema indicating it is required.

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 ('Load an MPH file') and the effect ('select it as current'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'model_create' (create new model) and 'save_model' (save).

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 vs alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., server must be connected via 'server_connect'), and no context about required order of operations.

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