Skip to main content
Glama
pzfreo

build123d-mcp

suggest_view_layout

Calculates safe view positions for multi-view engineering drawings. Returns JSON with VIEW_X, VIEW_Y, look_at, camera, and up vectors for a standard third-angle layout.

Instructions

Auto-calculate safe VIEW_X / VIEW_Y positions for a multi-view engineering drawing.

Measures the named shape's bounding box and returns per-view page positions
(VIEW_X, VIEW_Y), look_at values, and camera/up vectors for a standard
third-angle layout:

    [plan ]  [      ]
    [front]  [ side ] [ iso ]
                      [ title block (bottom-right) ]

Returns JSON with:
  views: {name: {VIEW_X, VIEW_Y, half_w, half_h, look_at, camera, up}}
  warnings: list of layout problems (out-of-bounds, title-block overlap)
  suggestion: recommended page_w/page_h/scale if the layout does not fit

object_name: name from show() — use "" to measure the current shape
page_w/page_h: sheet size in mm (default A4 landscape 297×210)
scale: drawing scale factor (default 1.0; use 2.0 for 2:1)
views: subset of ["front","plan","side","iso"] to place
title_block_w/h: reserved bottom-right area (default 150×30 mm)
margin: page margin in mm (default 10)
extents: [x, y, z] part sizes in mm — lays out from these numbers instead
    of a session object (use when the part isn't loaded, e.g. import failed)
centroid: [x, y, z] look_at origin when using extents (default [0, 0, 0])

Accuracy: front/plan/side positions are exact for orthographic projection.
Iso position is approximate (75% of 3-D diagonal as half-extent) — verify
with render_view() and adjust manually if the iso overlaps a neighbour.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
object_nameNo
page_wNo
page_hNo
scaleNo
viewsNo
title_block_wNo
title_block_hNo
marginNo
extentsNo
centroidNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it returns a JSON with views, warnings, and a suggestion. It states accuracy levels (exact for orthographic, approximate for iso) and explains how extents work when the part is not loaded. No contradictions.

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 lengthy but well-structured: purpose first, then a diagram, then return value description, then parameter list. Front-loaded with key information. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but overall efficient.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no schema descriptions, detailed output), the description is complete. It covers all inputs, outputs, accuracy, and edge cases (e.g., using extents when import fails). Output schema exists and is described in text.

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 must explain all parameters. It does so comprehensively: object_name, page_w/page_h, scale, views, title_block_w/h, margin, extents, and centroid are all described with defaults and usage notes (e.g., 'object_name: name from show() — use "" to measure the current shape').

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Auto-calculate safe VIEW_X / VIEW_Y positions for a multi-view engineering drawing.' It uses specific verbs (calculate, place) and a specific resource (view positions), distinguishing it from siblings like 'render_view' or 'inspect_drawing'.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides context on when to use the tool (e.g., laying out a multi-view drawing) and includes guidance for the iso position: 'verify with render_view() and adjust manually.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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