Skip to main content
Glama
MatteoBaisini

solidworks-mcp

extrude

Turns the last sketch into a solid or thin-walled extrusion, with blind, midplane, through-all, or up-to-surface end conditions and optional draft.

Instructions

Extrudes the last sketch as a solid (closing it automatically if open).

end_condition: blind = depth_mm on one side; midplane = depth_mm split on both sides; through_all = through the existing solid; up_to_surface = up to the face through up_to_point ([x, y, z] in mm, model coordinates). depth2_mm > 0 also extrudes that far in the opposite direction (not with midplane). draft_angle_deg tapers the sides (inwards, or outwards with draft_outward=True). thin_wall_mm > 0 makes a thin wall of that thickness along the profile instead of filling it; open profiles (e.g. a chain of lines) are then allowed. merge=False keeps the result as a separate body.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mergeNo
reverseNo
depth_mmNoExtrusion depth in mm (blind or midplane)
depth2_mmNoSecond direction depth in mm
up_to_pointNo
thin_wall_mmNoThin wall thickness in mm (0 for solid)
draft_outwardNo
end_conditionNoblind
draft_angle_degNoDraft angle in degrees (0 to <90)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavioral details: it creates a solid, auto-closes open sketches, allows open profiles only for thin-wall extrusions, and can leave the result as a separate body when merge=False. It also clarifies direction and draft behavior.

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 first sentence gives the core action and resource, and the following lines efficiently map parameter names to behavior. The structure is dense but appropriate for a nine-parameter CAD operation, with no wasted prose.

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 complex extrusion tool with nine optional parameters, the description covers most decision-relevant behavior, including end conditions, thin walls, merge behavior, and draft. It is nearly complete, though reverse and the exact effect of some combinations remain lightly specified.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 44%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does by explaining end_condition modes, depth2_mm interaction with midplane, draft direction, thin-wall behavior, and merge=False. It leaves reverse unexplained, which prevents a perfect score.

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 a specific CAD operation: extruding the last sketch into a solid. It clearly distinguishes this from cutting sibling operations like cut_extrude by specifying that the result is a solid, and it notes automatic sketch closing.

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 description implies usage after creating a sketch and explains several conditional behaviors, such as open profiles being allowed only with thin_wall_mm. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like cut_extrude or sweep and does not state when not to use this tool.

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