Retrieve recent AutoCAD changes and events after a sequence cursor. Filter by event type, document, and limit to track commands, entity edits, and operations.
Read the bounded AutoCAD change journal after a sequence cursor. Includes interactive commands, entity changes, document changes, MCP operations, and presentation steps.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| types | No | ||
| documentId | No | ||
| afterSequence | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful context about the bounded journal and sequence cursor, implying incremental reading. It does not describe return format or error behavior, but given the annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, well-formed sentence that packs the core action, resource, and event categories without any fluff. The most important information is front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and four optional parameters, the description covers the tool's purpose but leaves the return structure and parameter interactions unexplained. For a read-only tool with safety annotations, this is adequate but not thorough enough to merit a 4.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It this partially does: 'bounded' hints at the limit parameter, 'sequence cursor' maps to afterSequence, and the listed event types relate to the types filter. However, it does not explain documentId or the precise filtering semantics, so it only partially fills the gap.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a specific verb (Read) and resource (bounded AutoCAD change journal) plus the constraint 'after a sequence cursor'. It also enumerates event categories, which clearly distinguish it from other CAD inspection tools. However, it does not explicitly name sibling tools, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cad_inspect or cad_status. The description explains what the tool does but does not mention any selection criteria or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.