Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archicad-MCP

Archicad-MCP

by alesdev88
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Preview library parts

preview_library_parts
Read-only

Draws numbered 2D default symbols of up to 8 library parts in one image, with scale and insertion crosses, so you can compare candidates before learning one.

Instructions

Draw the 2D symbols of up to 8 library parts in one image, with nothing placed, to choose between candidates before learning one (a Tapir newer than 1.8.0). Each cell is numbered and has its own scale, with a red cross at the insertion point; 'parts' gives each part's number, default size (a, b, height) and extent in metres, and 'not_drawn' why a name could not be drawn, with the closest names. It shows the default parameters, and only lines, arcs and polygons, so no texts or hotspots. It does not replace learn_library_part or the look after placing.

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": {
      "names": "<names>"
    },
    "name": "preview_library_parts"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
portNo
namesYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description goes well beyond the readOnly/destructive annotations: it caps input at 8 parts, discloses what the image contains (numbered cells, per-cell scale, red cross at insertion point), and reports a 'parts' and 'not_drawn' result shape. This earns a solid 3, though limits like image resolution or performance are omitted.

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 purpose is front-loaded and every sentence carries information (limits, image contents, return fields, exclusions). The middle sentence is overly dense with semicolon-joined clauses, making it slightly hard to scan.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully sketches the return fields ('parts' with number, default size, extent in metres; 'not_drawn' with closest names) and the drawing limitations. 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description should carry the burden: it adds the meaningful 'up to 8 names' cap and explains the fallback behavior for unmatched names, but the 'port' parameter is never mentioned, leaving one of two parameters fully unexplained.

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?

The description names a concrete verb and resource ('Draw the 2D symbols of up to 8 library parts in one image') and immediately clarifies the non-obvious bit: nothing is placed in the model, so it is a non-mutating look at candidates, which cleanly separates it from learn_library_part.

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 an explicit use case ('to choose between candidates before learning one') and an exclusion ('does not replace learn_library_part or the look after placing'), plus a version prerequisite (Tapir newer than 1.8.0). It never spells out when learn_library_part is the better pick, so the routing guidance is strong but not complete.

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