Skip to main content
Glama
monoxide-xen

microcap-mcp

by monoxide-xen

simulate

Run SPICE netlists through Micro-Cap to return waveform data for transient, AC, DC, distortion, and stability analyses.

Instructions

Run a SPICE netlist through Micro-Cap and return the waveform data.

The netlist is plain SPICE. Rules that will bite you if ignored:

  • Node 0 is ground and must exist. Every node needs a DC path to it, or the run fails to converge.

  • A .PRINT line is mandatory — it names the outputs you want. Without it Micro-Cap emits only an operating-point dump and no waveforms.

  • Match the analysis to the question: ac for frequency response and gain/phase, transient for time-domain behaviour and start-up, dc for bias points and transfer curves.

  • Set the time span from the circuit's own constants. A .TRAN running for 10 s on a circuit with microsecond edges returns a flat line.

  • Active parts need their supplies wired; an op-amp without rails does nothing.

Args: netlist: full SPICE deck, first line is the title, ending in .END. analysis: transient | ac | dc | harmonic_distortion | intermodulation_distortion | dynamic_ac | dynamic_dc | stability. defines: values for .DEFINE symbols in the deck, e.g. {"R": "1K"}. max_points: cap on returned samples; the run itself is unaffected.

Returns: Columns, units, sampled data, solver statistics, and any warnings.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
definesNo
netlistYes
analysisNotransient
max_pointsNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses several behavioral traits: mandatory .PRINT line, need for DC path to ground, potential convergence failures, and the need for active parts to have wired supplies. It also describes what is returned, including solver statistics and warnings.

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: a one-sentence summary, then bulleted rules that are concise and actionable, followed by parameter definitions and return info. Every section earns its place without fluff.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Despite no annotations and 0% schema parameter coverage, the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, parameter semantics, and return values. It is comprehensive for a complex simulator tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates with an Args section that explains each parameter: netlist format, analysis options, defines dictionary, and max_points cap. This adds meaning far beyond the bare schema.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Run a SPICE netlist through Micro-Cap and return the waveform data.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like simulate_schematic, which would simulate a schematic rather than a netlist.

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?

The description provides explicit rules for when to use different analysis types ('ac for frequency response', 'transient for time-domain'), and advises setting time spans based on circuit constants. It implicitly differentiates from siblings by emphasizing that this tool takes plain SPICE netlists, which is a clear usage context.

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/monoxide-xen/microcap-mcp'

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