Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archicad-MCP

Archicad-MCP

by alesdev88
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Summarize model contents

get_model_summary
Read-only

Aggregate element counts by type, optionally broken down by layer and story, to assess model composition without retrieving element data.

Instructions

Aggregate element counts. by_type is always returned (cheap and safe). Set include_layer_story=true to also break down by layer and story, which reads a property across every element and is refused on very large models (can crash Archicad). Counts only, never element data. 'coverage' says what element_count spans: 'whole-plan' with the Tapir add-on, 'model-elements-only' without it (then it is NOT a project total). 'owned_parts' counts apart the GDL parts of stairs and other elements that Archicad types Object.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_model_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
portNo
include_layer_storyNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond readOnlyHint/destructiveHint by disclosing cost asymmetry between the default and the flag, hard refusal on very large models, a crash risk ('can crash Archicad'), and the semantic caveat that without the Tapir add-on the count is 'NOT a project total'. These are exactly the operational risks an agent needs before calling.

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 conditions, then caveats; nearly every clause carries information. The final sentence about 'owned_parts' and GDL parts typed as Object is telegraphic and slightly cryptic, but it is not wasted text.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, yet the description still productively explains the non-obvious output fields ('coverage', 'owned_parts', 'by_type'), plus the add-on dependency that changes the meaning of element_count. The only real hole is the undocumented 'port' parameter.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the load. It explains include_layer_story thoroughly (cost, refusal behavior) but never mentions the 'port' parameter, leaving one of two parameters undefined in both schema and prose. Half the parameters are well served, half are not.

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+resource ('Aggregate element counts') and immediately scopes what it is not: 'Counts only, never element data', which separates it from get_element_data and find_elements. The 'coverage' and 'owned_parts' sentences further pin down exactly what is counted, so an agent can pick it out of a 43-tool family without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit conditions for the optional flag: default by_type is 'cheap and safe', while include_layer_story=true 'reads a property across every element and is refused on very large models'. That is a real when-to-use/when-not pair. It stops short of naming an alternative tool for the large-model case, so it is not a 5.

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