AutoCAD MCP Pro

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Explode Block

block_explode

Destructive

Splits a block reference into its component entities and converts each attribute to TEXT or MTEXT, preserving values, placement, height, rotation, and layer.

Instructions

Explode a block reference into its component entities, keeping its attribute text (the Express Tools BURST rule, on both engines).

Every attached ATTRIB becomes a TEXT with the same value, placement, height, rotation and layer (an invisible attribute becomes an invisible TEXT; a multi-line attribute becomes an MTEXT carrying every line), and a constant attribute (which has no ATTRIB) becomes a TEXT of its value too; AutoCAD's plain EXPLODE would keep only the tag-name placeholders and drop the values. Everything lands in the layout that owns the reference (model space or its paper-space sheet), whichever tab is current. Returns inserted_handles (the geometry), attribute_texts (one TEXT or MTEXT handle per attribute), exploded_handle and backend. Refused, with nothing written: a handle that is not a block reference, a reference nested inside a block definition (explode the outer reference instead), an external reference (bind it first), a MINSERT grid, and -- headless only, capability explode_opaque_members -- a block holding a member ezdxf cannot transform (an OLE2FRAME logo, a VIEWPORT, a proxy entity without proxy graphics), named by member; the live engine hands those to AutoCAD. Not undoable except through drawing_undo / a transaction.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`handle`	Yes	Block reference (INSERT) entity handle

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond that: how ATTRIBs become TEXT/MTEXT, invisible/constant attribute handling, layout placement, no-undo semantics via drawing_undo/transaction, headless capability restrictions, and refusal cases with nothing written.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by dense but relevant behavioral detail. It is appropriately sized for a complex destructive operation, though some return-value detail overlaps with the output schema, keeping it from a perfect 5.

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?

Given the destructive nature, output schema, and multiple edge cases, the description covers refusal conditions, side effects, undo caveats, return fields, and engine differences. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and anticipate failures.

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 coverage is 100% and the single handle parameter is fully described in the schema as 'Block reference (INSERT) entity handle'. The description references the handle in refusal conditions but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Explode a block reference into its component entities, keeping its attribute text (the Express Tools BURST rule, on both engines).' It contrasts with AutoCAD's plain EXPLODE and makes the attribute-retention behavior central, which distinguishes it from sibling block_* tools.

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?

It clearly applies to block reference handles and lists when the operation is refused (non-block handle, nested reference, xref, MINSERT, opaque member). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools such as block_get_attributes or say when to prefer this over them, so it stops short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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

Deploy Server