nx-ai-bridge

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

open_part

Opens an existing .prt file and sets it as the active work part, enabling NX modeling and inspection tasks on that part.

Instructions

Open an existing .prt file and make it the work part.

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": {
      "path": "<path>"
    },
    "name": "open_part"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`path`	Yes	Absolute path of the .prt file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description bears the full burden. It does disclose the key side effect of changing the active/work part, which is real behavioral value, but it omits what happens to a part that is already open, whether unsaved changes are affected, and what occurs on a missing or invalid path.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the action and its state effect are packed into ten words with nothing wasted.

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?

For a one-parameter open operation with no output schema and complete schema coverage, the essential information (what it opens and that it becomes the work part) is present. Only edge-case behavior around an already-open part and error conditions is missing, a minor gap at this complexity level.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Only one parameter exists and schema description coverage is 100%; the schema already documents 'path' as the absolute path of the .prt file. The description adds no format, extension, or path restrictions beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Open') and resource ('an existing .prt file') plus the resulting state change ('make it the work part'). The word 'existing' implicitly separates it from new_part, but no sibling is named explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'existing .prt file' signals the file must already be on disk, and 'make it the work part' implies subsequent operations apply to it. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over new_part, close_part, or save_part, and no prerequisites such as whether another part may already be open.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.