Retrieve node IDs and coordinates from a given instance in an Abaqus model. Use this to inspect mesh geometry for analysis or validation.
List nodes in an instance.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| timeout | No | ||
| model_name | No | Model-1 | |
| instance_name | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It conveys that the operation is a read-only listing, but it does not explain return structure, filtering, pagination, or how timeout and model_name affect the operation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single clear sentence with no wasted words. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices useful guidance, making it minimally acceptable rather than well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Although an output schema exists, the description is insufficient for reliable tool selection among many node-related siblings. It omits what distinguishes list_nodes from list_elements and leaves the meaning of half the parameters undocumented.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate, but it only weakly hints at instance_name through the phrase 'in an instance.' The timeout and model_name parameters are completely unexplained, leaving the agent to guess their meaning.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description names a specific verb (list), a resource (nodes), and a scope (instance), so an agent can tell it apart from tools like list_elements or get_node_coordinates. It is not a tautology, but it does not elaborate on whether it returns all nodes or filtered results.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus siblings such as list_elements or get_node_coordinates. The agent must infer the appropriate context from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.