AutoCAD MCP Pro

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Server Status

system_status

Read-only

Retrieve the AutoCAD MCP Pro server and backend connection status, including capabilities, document revision details, and recent operation records.

Instructions

Get full status of the AutoCAD MCP Pro server and backend connection.

Returns backend name, connection status, capabilities, document info, and the document's document_id and content revision (headless: the active registry entry; live: the bound document, plus bound_document and active_document_changed). Live, the revision counts this server's own writes; edits the operator makes in AutoCAD are not counted.

operations lists the last 20 operation records, newest last: one per tool call (and per cad_batch step), with operation_id, tool, request_hash, state (committed / partial / failed / refused / quarantined / cancelled / unknown_commit / running), the document id and the revision before and after. Held in memory; a restart forgets them.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint, the description explains backend connectivity, live vs headless document binding, revision semantics, operation-record lifecycle states, and the fact that operation history is in-memory and lost on restart. This is unusually rich behavioral context for a status tool.

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 description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then structured into revision and operations details. It is somewhat long, but the detail is relevant and earns its place for a diagnostic status endpoint.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description adds crucial context about volatile operation history, live-vs-headless revision behavior, and the meaning of operation states. This is complete enough for an agent to interpret the tool's output correctly.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so parameter semantics baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no unnecessary parameter guidance and instead focuses on returned status fields.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Get full status of the AutoCAD MCP Pro server and backend connection.' It clearly distinguishes status/connection reporting from drawing operations, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from near siblings such as system_capabilities or system_about.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied by the status-reporting purpose, but there is no explicit 'use this when...' guidance and no named alternative for capability-only or document-specific queries. The agent can infer the use case, but the description leaves routing mostly to the tool name.

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

Deploy Server