Connect to the local ANSYS Mechanical server to enable read-only inspection and bounded operations on models, materials, loads, meshes, solves, and results.
[READ ONLY] Connect to the configured local Mechanical server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The '[READ ONLY]' prefix is a useful behavioral disclosure indicating no modifications. However, it does not explain connection state, whether the call is idempotent, what happens if the server is not running, or whether it must precede other tools.
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 one short sentence with no filler. The read-only trait is front-loaded and the rest directly states the operation and target. Every word earns its place.
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 zero-argument connection tool with an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It could benefit from a note about when to connect relative to sibling tools, but the core purpose and safety trait are covered.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, there is nothing for the description to add about arguments. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not introduce any confusion about inputs.
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 states a specific verb ('Connect') and a specific resource ('configured local Mechanical server'), making its purpose immediately obvious. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_project_info or solve_analysis, which are read/inspection or modification operations.
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?
No guidance is given about when to use this tool, such as 'call before other Mechanical operations' or 'only needed once per session.' Since siblings include mechanical_status and open_project, the agent gets no help choosing between them or knowing whether to connect first.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.