Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
COMSOL MCP Server

COMSOL MCP Server

by Zhangyoupeng1996
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

modeling_best_practices

Retrieve best practices for COMSOL modeling across geometry, mesh, physics, solver, and results categories to optimize simulation workflows.

Instructions

Get best practices for different modeling categories.

Categories:

  • "geometry": Geometry creation and import

  • "mesh": Mesh generation strategies

  • "physics": Physics interface configuration

  • "solver": Solver configuration and optimization

  • "results": Results evaluation and visualization

Args: category: Category to get best practices for

Returns: Best practices for the specified category

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "category": "<category>"
    },
    "name": "modeling_best_practices"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
categoryYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, prerequisites, or side effects. Minimal disclosure beyond the obvious knowledge retrieval purpose.

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?

Description is well-structured with a title, bullet list, and Args/Returns sections. It is concise and front-loaded, though the Args/Returns section is somewhat redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Missing output schema and description of return format (e.g., string, structure). Does not mention prerequisites like COMSOL connection or error cases. Adequate for a simple lookup but incomplete for a production tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description explicitly lists allowed category values (geometry, mesh, physics, solver, results), compensating for the lack of enum. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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?

Description clearly states it gets best practices for different modeling categories, with a specific verb and resource. Lists five concrete categories, distinguishing it from sibling operational tools like geometry_add_block or physics_add.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docs_get or troubleshoot. The description only lists categories but does not provide context for decision-making.

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