Skip to main content
Glama
gchen19

AnkusDrive

by gchen19
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

export_drawing

Export a drawing page to PDF, SVG, or DXF (format from file extension) headlessly, composing PDF/SVG from template, views, and dimensions; DXF uses native writer. Returns path, size, format, views, dimensions.

Instructions

Export a drawing page to PDF, SVG, or DXF (format inferred from the path extension), headless. PDF/SVG are composed from the template, the per-view geometry, and any dimensions/annotations on the page; DXF uses FreeCAD's native page writer. Returns {path, size, format, views, dimensions}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageYes
pathYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses useful traits: headless operation, format inferred from path extension, how PDF/SVG are composed versus DXF using FreeCAD's native writer, and the return fields. It still omits error conditions, overwrite behavior, and whether the page must already exist.

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?

Front-loads the tool's action and formats, then compactly covers composition behavior and the return shape. Every clause is informative, and there is no redundant filler.

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?

For a write-like export tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description usefully states the return fields and format behavior. However, it leaves important context unstated: file-system side effects (overwrite behavior, directory requirements), error cases, and clarification of the 'page' parameter.

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

Parameters2/5

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 adds meaning for 'path' by explaining format inference from the extension, but gives no explanation of what 'page' refers to (name, handle, object) beyond the generic term 'drawing page.'

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (export) and resource (drawing page) with supported formats (PDF/SVG/DXF). It implicitly distinguishes from shape or sheet exporters by naming 'drawing page,' but does not explicitly name any sibling tool as an alternative.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like render_view, export_shape, or sheet_flat_export. The format-inference rule is a behavioral detail, not usage routing.

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