Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CDT AutoCAD Provider

CDT AutoCAD Provider

by SlncTrZ
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

viewport_set_scale

Sets a paper-space viewport’s positive custom architectural or engineering scale by handle, then returns the verified scale and derived view height.

Instructions

Set a paper-space viewport's positive custom scale by handle and return the verified scale and derived view height.

Side-effects: Updates viewport magnification and view height. Disambiguation: Adjusts architectural/engineering scale (e.g. 1:50, 1:100).

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>",
      "scale": "<scale>"
    },
    "name": "viewport_set_scale"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scaleYesPositive scale factor (paper units / model units)
handleYesPersistent CAD handle of the viewport entity

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / handle / description
      Added value: +"Persistent CAD handle of the viewport entity"
    • addedInput schema / properties / scale / description
      Added value: +"Positive scale factor (paper units / model units)"
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries most of the burden. It does disclose side-effects (viewport magnification and view height are changed) and the verified return values, which is valuable context. It omits error/failure behavior for invalid handles or non-positive scales.

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 with the core action front-loaded, side-effects and disambiguation separated clearly. Every sentence earns its place with zero padding.

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, the description needn't detail return values, yet it helpfully names them anyway. Side-effects and scale semantics are covered; the only gap is failure-mode behavior for invalid input, which is minor for this scope.

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%, so both 'scale' (positive paper/model unit ratio) and 'handle' (persistent CAD handle) are already fully documented. The description reinforces 'positive custom scale' but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Set a paper-space viewport's positive custom scale by handle') and even declares the return value. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like viewport_lock, viewport_delete, or object_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?

The disambiguation line clarifies this sets architectural/engineering scale (1:50, 1:100), which implicitly separates it from object_scale and other viewport tools. It lacks explicit when-not guidance or naming of an alternative sibling, so it stops 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