Skip to main content
Glama
U-C4N

AutoCAD MCP Pro

by U-C4N
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

New Drawing

drawing_new

Create a new AutoCAD drawing from a bundled or file-path template, and optionally add standard engineering layers and linetypes.

Instructions

Create a new drawing, optionally from a template.

A bundled name resolves to templates/<name>.dxf headlessly and templates/<name>.dwt on the live engine (falling back to the DXF with source: "bundled_dxf" when no .dwt twin is committed); a path is used as given. The result carries template: {name|path, path, source}.

On the live engine only a genuine .dwt reaches Documents.Add — measured on AutoCAD 2026, Add(<file.dxf>) silently returns the default drawing — so a .dxf template (bundled or a path) is first converted through AutoCAD into a cached .dwt and template.dwt names it (template.dwt_cached says whether the conversion was reused). The drawing then really carries the template's layers, tabs and page setup.

Refused before anything is replaced: a bare name that is not in the catalogue (the message lists the five), a template path that does not exist, and a path outside the allowed directories. With bootstrap=True (default) the standard engineering linetypes and layers are ensured afterwards — idempotent on a template that already has them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
templateNoBundled template name (drawing_template_list: iso_a3_mech, iso_a1_arch, iso_a3_pid, ansi_b_mech, ansi_d_arch) or a path to a .dwt/.dxf template file.
bootstrapNoAuto-load CENTER/HIDDEN/PHANTOM linetypes and create standard engineering layers (GEOMETRY, DIM, CENTER, HIDDEN, PHANTOM, HATCH, TEXT, TITLEBLOCK). Disable for vanilla DXF.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.6.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / template / description
      Previous value: -"Optional path to .dwt template file"New value: +"Bundled template name (drawing_template_list: iso_a3_mech, iso_a1_arch, iso_a3_pid, ansi_b_mech, ansi_d_arch) or a path to a .dwt/.dxf template file."
  2. First observedv1.4.0

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=false, yet the description discloses extensive behavior: refusal conditions before any replacement, the .dxf→.dwt conversion and caching on the live engine, the measured AutoCAD 2026 quirk, and idempotent bootstrap side effects (linetypes/layers added). This is far beyond what the annotation provides.

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 layered detail in digestible paragraphs. It is long and parenthetical-heavy, but nearly every sentence carries non-obvious behavioral information, so the length is largely earned rather than padding.

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?

For a complex tool with an output schema already covering return values, the description still explains the template result shape, refusal modes, engine-specific conversion, and bootstrap semantics. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and anticipate side effects.

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 genuinely deepens both parameters: it explains bundled-name→path mapping and the `source` field for template, and clarifies that bootstrap is idempotent and ensures standard linetypes/layers (disable for vanilla DXF), which the schema only summarizes.

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?

Opens with a precise verb+resource ('Create a new drawing') and immediately qualifies scope ('optionally from a template'). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like drawing_open, drawing_template_list, and drawing_save, which the template-resolution detail reinforces.

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 gives clear context for when the template argument produces which behavior, including bundled-name vs path resolution and the fallback to DXF. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives (e.g. drawing_open for existing drawings) or stating when to leave template unset.

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