scaps-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Run a SCAPS simulation

scaps_simulate

Simulate solar-cell J-V, QE, C-V, C-f and spatial profiles from SCAPS definitions, apply run-only overrides, and analyze results with Shockley-Queisser limits, integrated Jsc, and Mott-Schottky fits.

Instructions

Simulate a device: J-V metrics, QE, C-V, C-f and spatial profiles, with analysis and realism checks.

Analysis gives the absorber's Shockley-Queisser limit, QE-integrated Jsc and a Mott-Schottky fit of C-V. Overrides apply to this run only; files stay available through scaps_results and scaps_plot.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`actions`	No	SCAPS action commands, e.g. {'iv.startV': 0, 'iv.stopV': 1.2, 'iv.increment': 0.02, 'qe.startlambda': 300, 'cf.points.per.decade': 5, 'intensity.ND': 1, 'spectrumcutoff.on': null, 'spectrumcutoff.longlambda': 800}. Omitted settings keep SCAPS defaults.
`profiles`	No	Spatial results at the working point voltage: eb (bands, quasi-Fermi levels, carriers, field, currents, generation and recombination rates) and genrec (occupation of every defect level); ac (small signal) at the last point of a cv or cf measurement.
`spectrum`	No	Spectrum file in SCAPS spectrum/; default AM1.5G 1 sun.
`voltage_v`	No	Working point bias in V.
`definition`	Yes	Definition file in SCAPS def/, e.g. 'example CIGS.def'.
`parameters`	No	Ordered SCAPS set commands in script units, e.g. {'layer1.thickness': 2, 'layer1.NA': 1e16, 'layer1.defect1.Ntotal': 1e14, 'layer1.defect1.singleacceptor': null, 'interface1.IFdefect1.Ntotal': 1e10, 'contactleft.flatband.off': null, 'contactleft.workfunction': 5.1, 'external.Rs': 0.5, 'illumination.fromleft': null, 'numerical.Shockley-Queisser_limit.always': null}. null marks commands without a value.
`frequency_hz`	No	Working point frequency in Hz.
`illumination`	No	Calculate under the spectrum or in the dark.	light
`measurements`	No	Measurements: iv (J-V), qe, cv, cf. May be empty when profiles are requested.
`wait_seconds`	No	Wait this long for the result; longer runs continue as a job.
`temperature_k`	No	Working point temperature in K.
`response_format`	No	detailed adds the key columns of each curve.	concise

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`files`	Yes
`checks`	Yes
`curves`	Yes
`run_id`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`metrics`	Yes
`seconds`	Yes
`analysis`	Yes
`profiles`	Yes
`progress`	Yes
`definition`	Yes
`measurements`	Yes
`scaps_errors`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: overrides are run-scoped and not persisted, and artifacts remain reachable through scaps_results and scaps_plot. It does not describe job continuation semantics or cost/failure behavior, but that is largely covered by the wait_seconds schema field.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and outputs, then analysis, then persistence semantics. No filler; the only slightly soft phrase is 'realism checks', which is never unpacked.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the description covers analysis results, override scoping, and artifact access. For a 12-parameter simulation entry point it is nearly complete; the main gaps are sibling routing and the meaning of 'realism checks'.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 12 parameters in detail. The description adds no parameter-level meaning (e.g. how 'parameters' interacts with 'definition', or what 'profiles' require). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 resource ('Simulate a device') and enumerates the computed outputs (J-V, QE, C-V, C-f, spatial profiles) plus analysis. It does not explicitly separate itself from close siblings like scaps_run_script or scaps_batch, though the mention of scaps_results/scaps_plot hints at its position in the workflow.

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 scope ('Overrides apply to this run only') and by pointing to scaps_results and scaps_plot for persisted output, which routes the agent after a run. There is no explicit when-to-use / when-not guidance relative to scaps_run_script, scaps_batch, or scaps_optimize.

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

Deploy Server