Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDT AutoCAD Provider

CDT AutoCAD Provider

by SlncTrZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

layer_create

Create a new AutoCAD layer with a specified color index; existing layer names are refused and the active layer remains unchanged.

Instructions

Create a new layer with the requested AutoCAD color index; existing names are refused and the active layer is not changed.

Side-effects: Adds layer record to drawing layer table. Disambiguation: Refuses if layer already exists; use layer_update_state to modify existing layers.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "layer_create"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesNew layer name to create (must be unique in drawing)
colorNoAutoCAD Color Index (ACI 1-255) (default: 7 - White/Black)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / color / description
      Added value: +"AutoCAD Color Index (ACI 1-255) (default: 7 - White/Black)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Added value: +"New layer name to create (must be unique in drawing)"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, while the description adds important behavior: it mutates the drawing by adding a layer table record, refuses duplicates, and leaves the active layer unchanged. These are exactly the side-effect and failure-mode details an agent needs before calling a write tool.

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?

Front-loads the core action, then separately states side-effects and disambiguation in short, scannable sentences. There is no wasted wording.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given full schema coverage, an output schema, and relevant annotations, the description covers the missing behavioral context: what it creates, what it refuses, what it does not change, and which sibling to use for updates.

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%, and the schema already documents both parameters, including the ACI range/default and name uniqueness. The description reinforces the color-index and uniqueness semantics but does not add substantial parameter detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a new layer') plus key scope details: AutoCAD color index, duplicate-name refusal, and no change to the active layer. This clearly distinguishes it from layer_update_state and layer_set_current.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly says existing names are refused and directs the agent to layer_update_state for modifying existing layers. The note that the active layer is not changed also clarifies that this tool is not for making a layer current.

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