Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CAD-CAE-Agent SolidWorks MCP Server

CAD-CAE-Agent SolidWorks MCP Server

by caoguanqiu1-alt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

generate_drawing_report

Creates a detailed drawing analysis report from supplied input data, helping you review dimensions, views, and annotations in SOLIDWORKS drawings.

Instructions

Generate comprehensive drawing analysis report.

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_dataYesThe input data value.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.2.0

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It only says 'generate report' without indicating whether the operation is read-only, modifies the model, or has side effects. The description fails to disclose important behavioral information.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is concise at one sentence, but it is too brief to be informative. It lacks necessary detail to be fully useful, bordering on under-specification rather than efficient communication.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool is part of a complex domain (CAD drawing analysis) with many sibling tools, but the description provides minimal context about inputs, outputs, or analysis scope. Even with an output schema existing, the description fails to make the tool's role clear.

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 description coverage is 100% (one parameter described), so baseline is 3. However, the schema description 'The input data value.' is vague, and the tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, leaving its semantics unclear.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the verb 'Generate' and resource 'drawing analysis report', giving a general sense of what the tool does. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like analyze_drawing_comprehensive or check_drawing_compliance, which could be interpreted as similar.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions for use. It is completely missing any usage context.

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