Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
self-host-fusion360-mcp

self-host-fusion360-mcp

by mystify59
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fusion_sketch_project

Project a body's edges onto a sketch to create linked reference geometry.

Instructions

Project a body's edges onto a sketch (linked reference geometry).

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": {
      "sketch": "<sketch>",
      "body": "<body>"
    },
    "name": "fusion_sketch_project"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bodyYes
sketchYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.6.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and open-world behavior; description adds that it projects edges and creates linked reference geometry. However, does not explain update behavior, whether it creates new sketch entities, or if the projection is dynamic.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant words. Action verb front-loaded. Highly concise and easy to parse.

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?

Given two simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential operation. Could mention that the sketch must exist on a plane, but sufficiently complete for a straightforward tool.

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

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description clarifies the role of each parameter: 'body' as source of edges, 'sketch' as target. This adds functional meaning beyond raw parameter names.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'project' and identifies resource 'body's edges onto a sketch'. Mentions 'linked reference geometry' to distinguish from other sketch creation tools. Clearly differentiates from siblings like fusion_sketch_line or fusion_sketch_circle.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as drawing geometry directly or using other projection methods. Does not specify prerequisites or typical use cases.

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