Retrieve every dimension in the current SolidWorks part, including name, feature, value, and unit, so agents can set dimensions or recover names after reopening a disk file.
List every dimension in the current part: name (for set_dimension), feature, value, unit.
For a part opened from disk, or when the names the tools returned are gone.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.16.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the returned fields and the reopened-part/name-loss scenario, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, permissions, or error behavior; 'List' implies a safe read, but the disclosure is thin for a zero-annotation tool.
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?
The description is short and front-loads the action and output fields. The second sentence is a sentence fragment, which slightly weakens structure, but there is no wasted text.
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?
For a simple no-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description does a good job naming the returned fields and giving a use condition. It is largely complete, though it could clarify return order or shape for greater certainty.
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 has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. Schema coverage is 100%, and the empty input schema is self-explanatory. Baseline 4 is appropriate.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'List every dimension in the current part.' It also lists the returned fields and ties the name field to set_dimension, so an agent can distinguish this tool from sibling set_dimension.
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?
Gives an implied use case: 'For a part opened from disk, or when the names the tools returned are gone.' This points to when the tool is needed, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools beyond the parenthetical reference to set_dimension.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.