Skip to main content
Glama
pzfreo

build123d-mcp

lint_drawing

Run structural drawing-quality checks to detect label-measured divergence, overlaps, redundant lines, and page-bound overshoot. Identify SVG export issues like native elements. Catches bugs before rendering.

Instructions

Run structural drawing-quality checks and return JSON {violations: [...]}.

Session mode (default): reconstructs the session's annotations and delegates
to build123d-drafting-helpers (lint_drawing + find_interferences) — single
source of truth. Surfaces label-vs-measured divergence (axis swap), Leader
line through its own label, annotation/label overlap, a witness/extension
line piercing a neighbour's label, redundant collinear lines, and page-bounds
overshoot.

SVG mode (svg_path set): scans an SVG file for export-only pathologies — most
importantly native <text> elements (build123d renders glyph paths, so any
<text> won't DXF-export and won't scale with the model).

drawing_scale: when the geometry was scaled up before projecting — e.g. a
7.5 mm feature drawn at 5:1 via part.scale(5) — pass the same factor (5.0)
so the label-vs-measured check divides each measured path length by it
before comparing to the label. This lets labels carry the *real* dimension
while the geometry is drawn enlarged, instead of every dim tripping a false
axis-swap warning. Session mode only; defaults to 1.0 (no scaling).

view_shape_names: list of shape names (from show()) representing the placed
view outlines. Used to detect view_annotation_overlap (annotation bbox
overlaps a view outline) and view_overlap (two view outlines overlap).
Pass the visible-side placed compounds from each projection, e.g.
["front_placed", "side_placed", "plan_placed", "iso"]. Session mode only.

Each violation is {severity, check, object, message}. Run this after major
drawing additions; running it BEFORE rendering catches the bug at the source.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
svg_pathNo
drawing_scaleNo
view_shape_namesNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains two modes (session and SVG), delegates to external helpers in session mode, and describes specific checks performed. It also clarifies the scaling behavior for drawing_scale. However, it doesn't mention whether the tool is read-only or has side effects, though as a linting tool it is likely safe.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with an initial summary, detailed mode explanations, and parameter descriptions. It is somewhat lengthy but each sentence adds value. Minor opportunity to condense: the opening could be slightly tighter.

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?

The description covers modes, all parameters, return format (JSON with violations), example violation structure, and provides timing guidance. Given the tool has an output schema (not shown) and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete and leaves little ambiguity.

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%, yet the description thoroughly explains each parameter: svg_path for SVG mode, drawing_scale for scaling adjustment with context, and view_shape_names for overlap detection with examples. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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?

The description clearly states the tool performs structural drawing-quality checks and returns a violations JSON. It specifies specific checks like label-vs-measured divergence, overlap detection, etc. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like inspect_drawing, which could lead to confusion about when to use which.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives timing guidance: 'Run this after major drawing additions; running it BEFORE rendering catches the bug at the source.' But it does not specify when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools like inspect_drawing for different inspection needs.

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/pzfreo/build123d-mcp'

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