Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP_CAD

MCP_CAD

by danielproxd2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

modify_dimension

Change a specific dimension on a feature or mate in SOLIDWORKS, updating its value in millimeters or degrees.

Instructions

Change a single dimension on a feature in the active part or assembly.

Args: feature_name: Exact name of the feature, e.g. "Boss-Extrude1" — or a mate name ("Distance1") when an ensamble is active. dimension_name: Exact name of the dimension within the feature, e.g. "D1". new_value_mm: New value in millimeters (degrees for angle dims, including angle mates).

Returns the updated feature state.

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": {
      "feature_name": "<feature_name>",
      "dimension_name": "<dimension_name>",
      "new_value_mm": "<new_value_mm>"
    },
    "name": "modify_dimension"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
feature_nameYes
new_value_mmYes
dimension_nameYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool modifies a dimension and returns updated state, but omits behavioral traits like whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or triggers model rebuilds. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence, bulleted Args with examples, and a returns statement. Every sentence adds value, and the front-loaded main action aids quick understanding.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description covers parameters well but lacks context on error conditions, required document state, or side effects. Returns statement is useful but incomplete for safe invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains feature_name includes mate names in assemblies, dimension_name expects exact naming like 'D1', and new_value_mm specifies units and handling of angle dimensions. This adds critical meaning beyond the basic schema titles.

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 'Change a single dimension on a feature in the active part or assembly,' providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_dimensions or add_sketch_dimension by focusing on modification of existing dimensions.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description implies usage for modifying existing dimensions, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor any exclusion criteria. It lacks context about prerequisites or when not to use this tool.

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