Skip to main content
Glama

run_cfd_solver

Run aerodynamic CFD simulations on a 2D airfoil mesh by specifying velocity, angle of attack, and solver backend (NeuralFoil or SU2).

Instructions

Run NeuralFoil synchronously or submit an SU2 background job from a mesh_id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
machNoOptional Mach number override. If omitted, it is computed from velocity and speed_of_sound.
n_critNoNeuralFoil e^N critical amplification factor.
mesh_idYesmesh_id returned by generate_2d_mesh.
velocityYesFreestream velocity in meters per second.
xtr_lowerNoForced transition location on the lower surface as x/c in [0, 1].
xtr_upperNoForced transition location on the upper surface as x/c in [0, 1].
cfl_numberNoSU2 CFL number.
model_sizeNoNeuralFoil surrogate model size preset.large
low_mach_precNoEnable SU2 low-Mach preconditioning.
max_iterationsNoMaximum nonlinear iterations for the selected solver backend.
solver_backendNoSolver backend: 'neuralfoil' or 'su2'.neuralfoil
speed_of_soundNoSpeed of sound in meters per second used to compute Mach.
angle_of_attackYesAngle of attack in degrees.
reynolds_numberNoOptional Reynolds number override. If omitted, it is computed from velocity and chord.
turbulence_modelNoSU2 flow model: EULER, NAVIER_STOKES, or RANS.RANS
kinematic_viscosityNoFluid kinematic viscosity in square meters per second.
su2_timeout_secondsNoMaximum wall-clock time allowed for the SU2 subprocess.
convergence_residualNoSU2 convergence target expressed as log10 residual.
include_360_deg_effectsNoEnable NeuralFoil's 360-degree post-stall correction model.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses synchronous execution for NeuralFoil and background job submission for SU2, but omits side effects, job lifecycle, result retrieval mechanisms, and failure behavior. This is minimal behavioral context for a complex solver tool.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the verb and backend modes. However, given the tool's complexity, the brevity borders on under-specification rather than elegant conciseness.

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?

This is a high-complexity tool with 19 parameters, dual backend modes, and asynchronous behavior, yet the description is one sentence. It does not explain the background job workflow, how results are obtained, or tie into sibling tools like check_solver_results. The presence of an output schema helps but does not compensate for missing operational context.

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?

All 19 parameters have detailed schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds only backend-mode context (synchronous vs. background), which is useful but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Run' and clearly names 'NeuralFoil' and 'SU2' backends, scoped 'from a mesh_id.' It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like run_airfoil_workflow or check_solver_results, but the core purpose is identifiable.

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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The phrase 'from a mesh_id' implies a prerequisite, but there is no instruction on choosing between NeuralFoil and SU2 backends or how this relates to run_airfoil_workflow or check_solver_results.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DaveFan-NCHC/MCP-Server-for-CFD'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server