Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ifc-geometry-mcp

ifc-geometry-mcp

by Slimouzi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

run_space_clash_audit

Audit an IFC model to detect duplicate spaces, overlaps, and double-modeled closets, outputting results to a JSON file.

Instructions

Détecte doublons, chevauchements et placards double-modélisés.

Écrit <stem>_space_clash_findings.json (schéma run_space_clash_audit).

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": {
      "ifc_path": "<ifc_path>"
    },
    "name": "run_space_clash_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
ifc_pathYesChemin de la maquette IFC.
overwriteNoÉcrase le JSON existant.
duplicate_ratioNoRecouvrement mutuel au-delà duquel deux pièces sont considérées en doublon (défaut 0.90).
overlap_min_ratioNoRecouvrement mini (sur la plus petite pièce) pour un chevauchement (défaut 0.10).
closet_inside_ratioNoInclusion mini d'un placard dans une pièce pour un double-modélisé (défaut 0.80).
vertical_min_overlap_mNoChevauchement vertical mini (m) entre pièces d'étages différents (défaut 0.20).

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool writes a JSON file with a specific schema, which is a useful side-effect. However, it does not explicitly state whether the analysis is read-only, whether it can overwrite files, or any prerequisites or failure modes, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 description is exceptionally concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the purpose and then state the output. No wasted words or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 6 parameters and an output schema, the description explains the core purpose and output file but does not elaborate on the audit process or the contents of the findings JSON. It is adequate given the schema, but lacks broader context like when to choose this tool over siblings or what the findings look like.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter clearly described (ifc_path, overwrite, duplicate_ratio, etc.). The tool description adds minimal parameter-specific value, only hinting at the output file naming pattern via `<stem>` from ifc_path. Thus the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool detects duplicates, overlaps, and double-modeled closets, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like check_space_boundaries or extract_space_inventory, which target different aspects of space analysis.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any exclusions or alternative tools, leaving usage only implied by the name and purpose.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools