Skip to main content
Glama

run_assembly_plan

Execute a recorded assembly plan by sequentially inserting and mating each component live, with per-step receipts and automatic stop on failure; saves only after verifying all components are properly mated.

Instructions

Ejecuta un AssemblyPlan registrado: inserta y matea componente POR componente (nunca insertar-todo-y-matear-al-final), con recibo por paso (conteo de componentes/mates vía get_active_assembly_info).

ESTA llamada (aprobada en el cliente MCP) es la aprobación humana del ensamble completo. Los pasos corren secuenciales EN VIVO — no van en execute_batch: los mates necesitan rebuilds reales y el rollback de lote no puede borrar componentes (el borrado está diferido por diseño).

Compuertas: go_recommendation='partial_or_handback' bloquea salvo override_low_confidence=True; componentes sin mates bloquean salvo override_unmated=True (flags independientes — forzar una NO desactiva la otra); '' se rechaza SIEMPRE. place_and_mate con pose_held=False cuenta como fallo del paso. Fallo a medio plan → se DETIENE y reporta estado parcial (qué se insertó, qué se mateó) — NO se borra nada; mitigación sugerida: set_component_suppression.

Verificación final: mates ≥ componentes-1 y sin componentes flotantes; solo si pasa (y hay save_path) se guarda. Devuelve {ok, steps, verification, saved, warnings}. [en: Execute a recorded AssemblyPlan — sequential live insert+mate per component, per-step receipts, stop-and-report on failure (no deletion), final mate-count gate; save only on verified success.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assembly_plan_idYes
override_unmatedNo
override_low_confidenceNo
Behavior5/5

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses extensive behavioral traits: sequential per-component execution, live per-step receipts, stop-and-report on failure with no deletion, final mate-count gate, and specific override behaviors. This fully compensates for missing annotations.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is detailed but well-structured: main action, approval context, batch comparison, gate explanations, failure behavior, verification. Each section adds value without waste. Slightly longer than necessary but concise for the complexity.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given no annotations, no output schema, and moderate parameter count, the description is remarkably complete. It covers purpose, behavior, failure handling, verification, return value, and even provides an English translation. All essential aspects are addressed for correct agent invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the two override parameters (override_unmated, override_low_confidence) in detail, including their interdependence and effects. assembly_plan_id is self-explanatory. The description adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool runs/executes an AssemblyPlan with specific behavioral details: inserting and mating components one by one, per-step receipts, and distinguishing from batch execution. The verb 'Ejecuta' and resource 'AssemblyPlan registrado' are explicitly mentioned.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use this tool (human approval of assembly) and contrasts with sibling execute_batch, explaining why batch is unsuitable. Also explains gates for overriding recommendations and unmated components, providing clear context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/danielproxd2/MCP_CAD'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server