Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDT AutoCAD Provider

CDT AutoCAD Provider

by SlncTrZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

viewport_delete

Permanently deletes a paper-space viewport by CAD handle; set force=true to remove pre-existing or unknown viewports that ActiveX cannot reliably identify.

Instructions

Delete a paper-space viewport by handle; pre-existing or unknown viewports require force=true because ActiveX cannot reliably identify the main viewport.

Side-effects: Destructive deletion of viewport from paper space. Disambiguation: Deletes viewport layout frame; pass force=True for unmanaged or preexisting viewports.

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": {
      "handle": "<handle>"
    },
    "name": "viewport_delete"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
forceNoRequired force confirmation flag to delete non-provider viewports (default: False)
handleYesPersistent CAD handle of the viewport entity to delete

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / force / description
      Added value: +"Required force confirmation flag to delete non-provider viewports (default: False)"
    • addedInput schema / properties / handle / description
      Added value: +"Persistent CAD handle of the viewport entity to delete"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only supply readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries most of the burden and does so: it discloses destructive deletion of the viewport and explains the underlying ActiveX limitation that motivates force. Reversibility (undo) and failure behavior are not mentioned, so not a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then side-effects and disambiguation as separate labeled lines. The force guidance is stated twice ('pre-existing or unknown viewports require force=true' and 'pass force=True for unmanaged or preexisting viewports'), which is minor waste.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers action, safety profile, and the force condition. Only the recovery path (undo behavior after deletion) is left unaddressed for a destructive, two-parameter tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining why force exists (ActiveX cannot reliably identify the main viewport) and which viewport classes it applies to. That is genuine added semantics.

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 with scope: 'Delete a paper-space viewport by handle.' The disambiguation line clarifies it removes the layout frame, not the content shown through it, which separates it from sibling tools like object_delete or viewport_set_scale.

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?

Gives a concrete condition for when force=true is required (pre-existing or unknown viewports), which is real usage guidance. It does not explicitly compare against object_delete or explain when deletion is inappropriate, keeping it short of a 5.

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