CDT AutoCAD Provider

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

layout_list

Read-only

Lists all document layouts and identifies the current one, so you can discover printable sheets without changing the active model or paper space.

Instructions

List document layouts and identify the current layout; this is read-only and does not change active model/paper space.

Side-effects: None. Read-only layout query. Disambiguation: Use to discover printable sheets.

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": "layout_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'read-only' and 'Side-effects: None.' It adds a small amount of context by noting that it does not change active model/paper space, but it largely repeats the annotation and does not add other behavioral details.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loads the core purpose. 'Side-effects: None. Read-only layout query.' is somewhat redundant with the first sentence, but the disambiguation line adds useful structure without excessive length.

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?

For a simple read-only list operation with no parameters, an output schema, and explicit read-only annotations, the description gives enough context for an agent to call it correctly. Return values are covered by the output schema, so no additional detail is required.

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 has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. With an empty input schema and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'List document layouts and identify the current layout.' It distinguishes itself from mutation siblings by emphasizing read-only behavior and by saying it is for discovering printable sheets, though it does not explicitly name alternatives like layout_create or layout_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 Guidelines4/5

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

The line 'Use to discover printable sheets' gives a clear usage context, and the read-only/no-change framing implicitly separates it from layout modification tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name the sibling alternative for changing layouts.

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

Deploy Server