cadkit

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

cad_shell

Create a hollow shell from a solid by removing selected faces and applying an inward wall thickness.

Instructions

Hollow the solid by removing the given faces and leaving a wall. thickness is inches (number) or #variable; wall is inward.

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": {
      "documentId": "<documentId>",
      "workspaceId": "<workspaceId>",
      "elementId": "<elementId>",
      "faceIds": "<faceIds>",
      "thickness": "<thickness>"
    },
    "name": "cad_shell"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`documentId`	Yes
`workspaceId`	Yes
`elementId`	Yes
`faceIds`	Yes
`thickness`	Yes
`name`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.3.0Jun 24, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; description only mentions wall direction is inward. Does not disclose behavior for invalid faces, negative thickness, or whether operation modifies original.

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?

Single sentence, concise, front-loads purpose. Could benefit from more structure to separate parameter info, but no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Complex CAD shell operation with no output schema, no annotations, and 6 parameters (5 required). Description lacks depth on behavior when thickness exceeds solid, face selection rules, or return value.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Only thickness is described (inches or variable). FaceIds are vaguely 'given faces'. Other parameters like documentId, workspaceId, elementId, name have no description. Schema coverage is 0%, so description falls short.

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 verb 'Hollow' and resource 'the solid' are clear. 'Removing the given faces and leaving a wall' distinguishes it from other CAD tools like extrude or chamfer.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No prerequisites (e.g., solid must be a closed volume) or when-not-to-use mentioned.

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