Export all open CATIA documents to a chosen directory in one format, like STEP or STL, with a single call to batch-convert your session's work.
Export every open 3D document to a directory in one format. Useful for turning a session's worth of work into STEP files in a single call.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| format | No | Format name, e.g. 'step' or 'stl'. | step |
| directory | Yes | Destination directory. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are all false, providing no safety profile. The description says 'export every open 3D document' but doesn't disclose potential side effects like creating files on disk, overwriting existing files, or handling of unsaved documents. It also doesn't mention any errors or limitations. Since annotations don't cover these, the description carries the burden and only partially discloses behavior.
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?
Two sentences, both informative, with no waste. The purpose is front-loaded. The second sentence gives a use case and example format, which is concise and helpful.
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?
The tool is simple with only 2 params and no output schema, but the description doesn't explain the success/failure behavior, whether a progress report is returned, or any prerequisites (e.g., documents must be saved). It's adequate for basic use but could be more complete for error handling and edge cases.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema documents both parameters. The description adds a hint that format has a default of 'step' and mentions 'STEP files' as an example, but otherwise doesn't add meaningful semantics beyond the schema. It doesn't clarify accepted format names or directory requirements.
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 clearly states the tool exports all open 3D documents to a directory in one format, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like catia_export (which likely exports a single document) and catia_save_all (which saves, not exports). However, it doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.
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?
The description implies usage for batch exporting a session's work, which is clear. It doesn't explicitly contrast with catia_export or list when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions. The example of STEP files gives a concrete use case, but no alternative routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.