Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Archicad MCP Connector

Archicad MCP Connector

by davidharutyunyan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Create attribute folders

create_attribute_folders

Creates attribute folders by full path, including any missing parents. Organize project attributes into hierarchies before moving them with move_attributes_to_folder.

Instructions

Creates attribute folders by full path; missing parent folders are created too (e.g. ['Проект', 'Стены'] creates both). Output: {results: [{folder, guid, ok: true} | {folder, error}]}. Move attributes in with move_attributes_to_folder.

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": {
      "folders": "<folders>"
    },
    "name": "create_attribute_folders"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
foldersYesFolder paths: ['A','B'] or 'A/B', or {attributeType, path}
attributeTypeNoAttribute type of all folders (or give it per folder)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare write, non-destructive, non-idempotent. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral detail: missing parent folders are auto-created, and the per-folder result format (guid/ok vs error) is shown despite no output schema. It does not state what happens on duplicate existing folders, but the disclosed cascade and output shape exceed the annotation baseline.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose plus cascade behavior first, output shape second, next-step sibling third. Front-loaded and free of waste.

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?

With annotations covering safety and a fully described input schema, the description supplies the missing output shape and cascade behavior needed to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain (e.g., behavior on existing folders, 200-item limit), but it is largely complete for a two-parameter creation tool.

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 100% and the schema itself explains path formats (array, slash-string, root), the {guid} alternative, and the attributeType enum in detail. The description only repeats 'by full path' and an example already present in the schema, adding no new semantics beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Creates attribute folders by full path') and clarifies scope with the cascade behavior. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling move_attributes_to_folder by directing attribute movement to that tool, so an agent can tell what this tool is and is not for.

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?

Implies usage (creating folders, then moving attributes in with a named sibling) but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no prerequisites, and no guidance on checking existing folders via get_attribute_folders first. The follow-up suggestion is helpful but not a full usage guideline.

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