Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
freecad-mcp

freecad-mcp

by DaveEdge1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

execute_code

Execute arbitrary Python code in FreeCAD to automate tasks, create or modify objects, and retrieve results with a screenshot.

Instructions

Execute arbitrary Python code in FreeCAD.

Args:
    code: The Python code to execute.

Returns:
    A message indicating the success or failure of the code execution, the output of the code execution, and a screenshot of the object.

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": {
      "code": "<code>"
    },
    "name": "execute_code"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.15

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that execution can be arbitrary, and returns success/failure, output, and a screenshot. However, it omits security implications, timeouts, or side effects.

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 extremely concise: two sentences plus an Args/Returns block. It front-loads the purpose, and every sentence serves a clear function without redundancy.

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?

Given the single parameter and existing output schema, the description explains the return values (message, output, screenshot) well. Minor gaps (no execution limits, environment details) prevent a 5.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description only restates the parameter name and type ('code: The Python code to execute'), adding no additional meaning like format, examples, or constraints.

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 states 'Execute arbitrary Python code in FreeCAD' with a specific verb ('execute') and resource ('Python code'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_object or get_view.

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, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The description merely states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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