Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
SolidworksMCP-python

SolidworksMCP-python

by andrewbartels1
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Generate Drawing Report

generate_drawing_report
Read-onlyIdempotent

Combines every drawing check into a single quality report for a SolidWorks drawing, so you can review all validation results at once.

Instructions

Write a quality report that combines every drawing check.

Not available yet: no adapter implements it, so every call returns an error with error_type: "not_supported". It is planned for a future release. Read-only. Returns: once available, the report under data.

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": {
      "input_data": "<input_data>"
    },
    "name": "generate_drawing_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
input_dataYesA mapping with the `drawing_path` of the drawing to report on.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / input_data / description
      Previous value: -"The input data value."New value: +"A mapping with the `drawing_path` of the drawing to report\non."
  2. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, so repeating 'Read-only' adds little. The real added value is disclosing the guaranteed failure mode with the exact error_type value and the future availability, which an agent cannot learn from annotations alone. Return shape under `data` is also noted, though an output schema already exists.

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?

Capability is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by the availability caveat and return note in order of importance to a caller. The line breaks are slightly awkward but no sentence is filler.

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?

For a currently unimplemented tool, the definition covers what it will do, that it will fail, and how it returns. The only gap is not pointing to whichever sibling covers the same reporting need today.

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?

With one parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents the drawing_path mapping. The description adds no format, path convention, or validation details beyond it, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and output artifact ('Write a quality report that combines every drawing check'), which separates it from single-check siblings like check_drawing_compliance or validate_drawing_completeness. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

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?

The most important usage fact is stated bluntly: no adapter implements it and every call returns error_type 'not_supported', which effectively tells the agent not to call it yet. However, there is no guidance on what to use instead for drawing quality reporting, so an agent is left to guess among the check_/validate_ siblings.

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