Skip to main content
Glama
danielproxd2

MCP_CAD

by danielproxd2

record_assembly_plan

Record a structured assembly plan for SolidWorks: define skeleton, ordered components with mates. Advisory only; review with designer before execution.

Instructions

Registra un AssemblyPlan estructurado (SKELETON → lista de partes → plan de mates) ANTES de tocar SolidWorks. Solo asesoría: no muta nada. Muéstrale el plan al diseñador; luego ejecútalo con run_assembly_plan.

Args: intent: Una oración: ¿qué ensamble es? skeleton: {file_path, insert_xyz_mm?, config_name?} — el componente FIJO (primer insert, auto-fijado). Elígelo deliberadamente (base/housing, nunca un tornillo). SIN mates. components: lista ORDENADA de {file_path, insert_xyz_mm?, config_name?, mates: [{tool, params, note?}], confidence?, note?}. Cada componente DEBE traer ≥1 mate (mate-or-incomplete). tool ∈ add_coincident_mate / add_concentric_mate / add_distance_mate / add_angle_mate / add_mate_by_face_position / stack_components / place_and_mate. En params usa '' (la instancia recién insertada) y '' — se sustituyen con los nombres vivos al ejecutar. Prefiere mates por posición/composites (nombres de entidad crudos son sensibles a locale); mates biestables (distance/angle) → envuélvelos en place_and_mate. save_path: .SLDASM para guardar al final ("" = no guardar). use_active_assembly: False → new_assembly primero. confidence: 0–10 global (escala de confianza del plan: ≥6 ejecuta).

Devuelve {assembly_plan_id, plan, warnings, unmated_components, go_recommendation}. Componentes sin mates o params '' BLOQUEAN run_assembly_plan. [en: Record a structured assembly plan — advisory only; review with the designer, then execute via run_assembly_plan.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
intentYes
skeletonYes
save_pathNo
componentsYes
confidenceNo
assumptionsNo
use_active_assemblyNo
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so description fully covers behavioral traits: clearly states 'no muta nada' (does not mutate), 'solo asesoría' (advisory only), and describes return values including warnings and blocking conditions for incomplete components. No contradiction.

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 verbose and bilingual (Spanish and English), adding length without additional information for an English-speaking agent. While structured and front-loaded, it could be more concise.

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?

Given the complexity (7 params, nested objects, no output schema or annotations), the description is quite detailed, covering the plan structure, mate tools, substitution mechanism, and return values. However, it misses the 'assumptions' parameter, and the confidence scale is briefly touched but not fully elaborated.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description must add meaning. It explains details for 6 of 7 parameters (intent, skeleton, components, save_path, use_active_assembly, confidence) but completely omits the 'assumptions' parameter from the description, which is present in the schema. This is a significant gap.

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 it records a structured assembly plan before touching SolidWorks, is advisory only, and does not mutate anything. It distinguishes from run_assembly_plan by noting that the plan should be reviewed with the designer and then executed via that tool.

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 tells when to use ('ANTES de tocar SolidWorks', advisory only) and when to use the sibling tool run_assembly_plan for execution. Also mentions that incomplete components block execution, guiding proper usage.

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/solidworks-mcp'

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