No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 243 tools
The tool set spans many domains (entity, layer, dimension, arch, mech, P&ID, drawing lifecycle, delivery) with broadly distinct purposes, but several families overlap heavily: entity_list, analysis_select_by_layer, analysis_select_by_type, analysis_find_in_region, selection_window, selection_polygon, selection_filter and entity_select_smart all return entity lists; drawing_info, system_status, analysis_entity_stats and analysis_layer_stats all report drawing state; drawing_save, drawing_save_as, drawing_export_dxf, drawing_export_dwg and drawing_deliver all write files. Descriptions often state which tool to prefer, but at 243 tools the risk of misselection is high.
There is a readable domain-prefix scheme (entity_, layer_, block_, drawing_, pid_, arch_, mech_, std_, layout_, viewset_) applied fairly consistently, but conventions are mixed: mostly verb_noun (entity_create_line, layer_create) alongside noun_verb (arch_grid, arch_plan_from_spec, drawing_understand, drawing_scale_check) and oddities like entity_delete_many or arch_wall. Readable but not a single predictable pattern.
243 tools is far beyond any reasonable surface for a single MCP server, dwarfing the 3-15 well-scoped range and even the 50+ extreme mismatch threshold. Even allowing for a large CAD domain, the surface is overgrown and many tools (batch/variants/wrappers) could be folded into fewer generic ones.
Coverage is unusually thorough: full drawing lifecycle, entity CRUD and modify operations, layers, blocks, dimensions, annotation (GD&T, welds, surface texture, title blocks, BOM), mechanical parts, P&ID graph/lines, architectural plans, plotting/delivery and requirement verification are all present. Minor gaps exist (no 3D solid modelling, limited trim/fillet/extend beyond LINE+LINE) but nothing that blocks core workflows.