Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDT AutoCAD Provider

CDT AutoCAD Provider

by SlncTrZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

layer_list

Read-only

Retrieve all drawing layers with names, colors, linetypes, visibility, frozen/locked states, and current layer status to inspect before placing entities.

Instructions

List drawing layers with normalized names, colors, linetypes, visibility/frozen/locked state, and whether each layer is current.

Side-effects: None. Read-only layer query. Disambiguation: Use to inspect existing layers before placing entities.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "layer_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Side-effects: None. Read-only layer query.' largely restates that. It does add the returned field set, which is modestly useful, but nothing about ordering, inclusion of xref-dependent layers, or empty-drawing behavior is disclosed.

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?

Three short labeled lines, purpose first, then side-effects, then usage. Every sentence carries distinct information and there is no filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a zero-parameter read-only list with an output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, and usage. Only a naming of the alternative layer tools would make it fully self-sufficient for routing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a zero-parameter schema applies. Nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

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 ('List') and resource ('drawing layers') and enumerates the returned attributes (names, colors, linetypes, visibility/frozen/locked, current flag), which distinguishes it from layer_create, layer_set_current, and layer_update_state by making clear it is the read path.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The disambiguation line gives an explicit situation: 'Use to inspect existing layers before placing entities.' That is a clear use context, but it names no alternative tool and offers no exclusion (e.g., when to prefer object_query or layer state tools instead).

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