Mechanical MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

suppress_bodies

Suppress or unsuppress simulation bodies by name prefix to control model geometry; leave prefix empty to apply to all bodies.

Instructions

Suppress or unsuppress bodies by name prefix (empty = all bodies). Args: name_prefix, suppress (True=suppress, False=unsuppress)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "suppress_bodies"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`suppress`	No
`name_prefix`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that an empty name prefix targets all bodies and that suppress=True/False controls the direction, but it does not describe reversibility, side effects on analysis, or required model state.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted text. The core operation is front-loaded, and the parameter notes are appended efficiently.

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?

For a simple two-parameter toggle with an output schema, the description covers the operation and both parameters adequately. It omits some domain side effects, such as how suppression affects downstream analysis, but the output schema handles return values.

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

Parameters4/5

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 explains both parameters: suppress as a boolean with True=suppress and False=unsuppress, and name_prefix as a prefix filter where empty means all bodies. It does not specify prefix matching rules such as case sensitivity.

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 states a specific verb and resource: suppress or unsuppress bodies by name prefix. It clearly distinguishes this operation from sibling tools such as add_* and solve_analysis, so an agent can identify its purpose immediately.

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 explains what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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