dream-creo-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

chamfer

Creates equal-distance edge bevels on selected Creo part edges by specifying the part name, edge IDs, and distance.

Instructions

Creates/edits geometry in the running Creo 5 through the DreamFeatureApp plugin. There is no mirror tool: build symmetric shapes with symmetric extrudes, revolves or patterns. Units are mm and degrees. Parts are addressed by name (lowercase, no .prt). Model axes: FRONT is the XY plane (normal +Z), TOP is XZ (normal +Y), RIGHT is YZ (normal +X). Each feature call either ends with an active feature or is rolled back. Nothing is saved unless model_save is called. Check results with model_info (volume, bound_box) and preview_image.

Equal-distance (D x D) chamfer on the listed edges (edge:N from find_geometry kind=edges).

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": {
      "name": "<name>",
      "edges": "<edges>",
      "distance": "<distance>"
    },
    "name": "chamfer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	Yes	Part name without .prt
`edges`	Yes
`distance`	Yes
`feature_name`	No	Optional feature name
`tangent_chain`	No	Also take every edge joined end to end with the same tangent (e.g. the other half of a circle)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.1Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the load and does it well: it discloses units (mm/degrees), that each feature call either ends with an active feature or is rolled back, that nothing persists unless model_save is called, and that there is no mirror tool so symmetric shapes need other constructions. Missing only permission/limit details.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The tool-specific chamfer sentence is tight and informative, but it sits at the very end behind a long block of shared preamble, so the actual purpose is not front-loaded. The boilerplate is useful once but repeated verbatim across many siblings, diluting its value here.

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 five-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers where edge IDs come from, units, rollback semantics, persistence, and how to verify results afterward. Only finer points like edge-body constraints and failure modes are absent.

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 60%, leaving 'edges' and 'distance' undocumented in the schema; the description compensates by explaining that edges are edge:N tokens from find_geometry and that distance is an equal-distance (D x D) value. That covers the two gaps but adds no constraint details such as maximum distance relative to adjacent geometry.

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?

Names a specific operation and resource — 'Equal-distance (D x D) chamfer on the listed edges' — and pins the edge identifier format to 'edge:N from find_geometry kind=edges'. It implicitly separates itself from the sibling 'round' by specifying a flat chamfer, though it never says so explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The prerequisite workflow is implied by pointing at find_geometry kind=edges, and the preamble tells the agent to verify with model_info and preview_image. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus 'round', no edge-case exclusions, and the surrounding context (units, axes, no-mirror) is shared boilerplate that applies to every sibling.

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