mcp-cst-studio
Related Servers
Alternatives to mcp-cst-studio
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables natural-language control of CST Studio Suite for electromagnetic simulation, covering modeling, materials, ports, solvers, result reading, and VBA scripting, with an embedded knowledge base and constraint hooks that self-evolve through use.8Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables natural-language-driven modeling, simulation, and optimization of antennas in CST Studio Suite, covering geometry, materials, ports, solvers, S-parameters, far-field analysis, parameter sweeps, and optimization via 73 MCP tools.2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceTurns CST Studio Suite into an AI-controllable electromagnetic design lab, enabling conversational THz metamaterial absorber design, unit-cell automation, Floquet port control, batch solve with checkpoint-resume, and surrogate-model predictions.2MIT
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI agents to control CST Studio Suite for 3D electromagnetic simulation, antenna design, and schematic-based field-circuit co-simulation through 177 MCP tools.1009AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to create, configure, solve, and retrieve results from electromagnetic antenna simulations through natural language commands.Apache 2.0
- AlicenseCqualityBmaintenanceEnables engineers to convert antenna papers/diagrams and natural language specs into auditable, versionable HFSS Python modeling code, with optional simulation and parametric optimization.622MIT
TDQS
Scored across 170 tools
Several tools have overlapping purposes that are hard to distinguish without deep CST knowledge: cst_optimizer vs cst_multi_objective_optimizer vs cst_constrained_optimizer, cst_get_farfield vs cst_get_radiation_pattern_3d vs cst_get_pattern_cut, and cst_get_impedance vs cst_get_smith_chart_data vs cst_analyze_impedance. Descriptions help in some cases, but with 170 tools the boundaries between many result-extraction and solver-configuration tools are blurry.
All names use snake_case with a cst_ prefix, which is readable, but the convention mixes verb-first (cst_get_*, cst_create_*, cst_set_*) with noun-first/domain patterns (cst_antenna_patch, cst_array_linear, cst_pcb_create_stackup, cst_matching_l_network, cst_optimizer). The result is a set of multiple sub-conventions rather than one predictable pattern.
170 tools is an extreme over-scoping for a single MCP server; many tools could be consolidated or made into parameters of broader tools. This volume makes tool selection and maintenance impractical for an agent.
The surface covers essentially every stage of the CST workflow: project management, geometry creation, materials, ports, boundaries, mesh, solvers, simulation control, result extraction, antenna templates, arrays, PCB design, and matching networks. No obvious domain lifecycle gaps remain.