Skip to main content
Glama
cafedaily

AutoCAD 2024 MCP

by cafedaily
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

cad_layer

Destructive

Manage drawing layers in AutoCAD: create, update, delete, rename, set current, isolate, or restore them to organize visibility and properties.

Instructions

Create, update, delete, rename, set current, isolate, or restore drawing layers.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
actionYes
newNameNo
propertiesNo
visualModeNoControl AutoCAD screen updates; step presents each created entity
zoomToResultNo
expectedRevisionNoDrawing revision returned by cad_status
highlightResultsNo
expectedDocumentIdNoDocument id returned by cad_status

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.1.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / expectedDocumentId
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Document id returned by cad_status",
+  "minLength": 1,
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / expectedRevision
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Drawing revision returned by cad_status",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "integer"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / highlightResults
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / visualMode
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Control AutoCAD screen updates; step presents each created entity",
+  "enum": [
+    "silent",
+    "batch",
+    "step"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / zoomToResult
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. First observedv0.0.3

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond restating the action enum; it does not explain consequences such as deleting being irreversible, what isolate/restore does to visibility, or whether changes require a document/revision check.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Every listed verb adds meaning, and the resource is immediately clear.

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

Completeness1/5

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

This is a complex, destructive tool with 9 parameters, nested objects, action-specific requirements, and no output schema. A one-line description is far from sufficient; an agent cannot determine per-action required parameters, return behavior, or error/side-effect expectations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With only 33% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for undocumented parameters, but it does not. It only paraphrases the action enum and provides no meaning for properties, visualMode, zoomToResult, expectedRevision, highlightResults, or expectedDocumentId.

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 identifies the resource (drawing layers) and enumerates all key operations: create, update, delete, rename, set current, isolate, restore. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like cad_draw and cad_edit by focusing exclusively on layer operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use cad_layer versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions. Usage can only be inferred from the resource name 'layers,' which is not explicit enough to route an agent reliably.

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