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_vba_drawing_dimensions

Create VBA macros that add various dimension types to SOLIDWORKS drawings for automated annotation.

Instructions

Generate VBA code for creating drawing dimensions.

Creates macro for various dimension types in drawings.

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_vba_drawing_dimensions"
  }
}

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

C2.4/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose key behavioral traits. It only states the tool generates code, but does not explain output format, side effects, or required permissions. The nature of 'creating a macro' is vague.

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?

Two sentences are adequate in length but could be more structured and informative. It is not overly verbose, but the brevity sacrifices clarity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is extremely sparse. It fails to specify supported dimension types, input format, code structure, or any constraints. An agent would have insufficient information to use the tool correctly.

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

Parameters1/5

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

The only parameter 'input_data' is described as 'The input data value.' with additionalProperties allowed. This adds no meaningful semantics beyond the schema. The description does not clarify what data should be provided.

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?

The description clearly states the tool generates VBA code for creating drawing dimensions, which distinguishes it from direct dimension addition tools like 'add_dimension'. However, it lacks specificity about what 'various dimension types' includes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_dimension' or 'generate_vba_code'. No prerequisites or context are mentioned.

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