Retrieves the active SolidWorks document's design tree and lists each feature with its type, so you can inspect model structure before editing.
List of the features of the active document (design tree), with the type of each.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that feature types are returned, but does not disclose ordering, tree nesting, whether suppressed features are included, or behavior when no document is active.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single compact sentence with no filler. The core resource and the returned feature-type detail are both front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given a zero-parameter read-only tool with a full output schema and annotations, the description is largely complete. Remaining gaps are minor behavioral details such as tree ordering and handling of suppressed features.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to clarify beyond the already-complete empty schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a clear resource—features of the active document's design tree—and adds that each item includes its type. It is more specific than the tool name alone, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby inspection tools such as get_active_document_info or get_dimensions.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It implies the tool inspects the active document's feature tree, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent must infer that this is for listing features rather than querying dimensions, properties, or document metadata.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.