Retrieve open FreeCAD documents to identify active files and, optionally, inspect labels, paths, modified flags, and save or recompute needs.
Get the list of open documents in FreeCAD.
With include_status=true, also return labels, file paths, GUI modified flags,
needs_save and needs_recompute. Default preserves the list of names.
Returns:
A list of document names, or a structured status snapshot.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| include_status | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the default result (document names) and the expanded status fields when include_status is true, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, whether it can fail, or what permissions are required.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and is generally efficient. The 'Returns' section and default clarification are useful, though slightly more compact phrasing could reduce minor redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and return shapes. It lacks error or permission context, but that is a minor gap for a read-oriented listing operation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
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 for the single boolean parameter. It does so effectively by explaining that include_status=true returns labels, file paths, modified flags, needs_save, and needs_recompute, and that the default returns names only.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description gives a specific verb and resource: 'Get the list of open documents in FreeCAD.' This clearly identifies the tool's scope, though it does not explicitly name or distinguish itself from siblings such as get_document_status or get_objects.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explains how the include_status parameter changes the result, but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_document_status or get_objects. There are no when-to-use or when-not-to-use statements.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.