Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Align Link Datums

revit_align_link_datums

Destructive

Align host Revit grids and levels to a linked model, optionally create missing datums, and preview changes with a dry run; no monitor relationship is created.

Instructions

Align host grids and levels to a loaded link, with optional creation and rollback preview. Does not create a monitor relationship.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`link`	Yes
`kinds`	No
`prefix`	No
`suffix`	No
`dry_run`	No
`document`	No	Title or file name substring of the target open document; needed when several are open.
`name_map`	No
`grid_type`	No
`level_type`	No
`tolerance_mm`	No
`create_missing`	No
`include_pinned`	No
`plan_view_type`	No
`reuse_matching`	No
`level_offset_mm`	No
`timeout_seconds`	No
`create_plan_views`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed21 schema fields changedv0.10.0Oct 14, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / create_missing / title
```
Removed value: -"Create Missing"
```
removedInput schema / properties / create_plan_views / title
```
Removed value: -"Create Plan Views"
```

changedInput schema / properties / document / description

Previous value: -"Case-insensitive substring of the target open document's title or file name. Required to disambiguate when the Revit process has more than one document open; omit only when a single document is open (the active document is used). An unknown or ambiguous reference is rejected before any change."New value: +"Title or file name substring of the target open document; needed when several are open."

removedInput schema / properties / document / title
```
Removed value: -"Document"
```
removedInput schema / properties / dry_run / title
```
Removed value: -"Dry Run"
```
removedInput schema / properties / grid_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Grid Type"
```
removedInput schema / properties / include_pinned / title
```
Removed value: -"Include Pinned"
```
removedInput schema / properties / kinds / title
```
Removed value: -"Kinds"
```
removedInput schema / properties / level_offset_mm / title
```
Removed value: -"Level Offset Mm"
```
removedInput schema / properties / level_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Level Type"
```
removedInput schema / properties / link / title
```
Removed value: -"Link"
```
removedInput schema / properties / name_map / title
```
Removed value: -"Name Map"
```
removedInput schema / properties / plan_view_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Plan View Type"
```
removedInput schema / properties / prefix / title
```
Removed value: -"Prefix"
```

removedInput schema / properties / response_timeout_s

Removed value: -{
-  "default": 600,
-  "maximum": 3600,
-  "minimum": 30,
-  "title": "Response Timeout S",
-  "type": "integer"
-}

removedInput schema / properties / reuse_matching / title
```
Removed value: -"Reuse Matching"
```
removedInput schema / properties / suffix / title
```
Removed value: -"Suffix"
```

addedInput schema / properties / timeout_seconds

Added value: +{
+  "default": 600,
+  "maximum": 3600,
+  "minimum": 30,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

removedInput schema / properties / tolerance_mm / title
```
Removed value: -"Tolerance Mm"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_align_link_datumsArguments"

removedOutput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_align_link_datumsDictOutput"

Addedv0.7.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation and non-idempotent nature is known. The description adds two genuinely new facts beyond the annotations: an optional creation step and a rollback preview, plus the monitor-relationship exclusion. It says nothing about what is destroyed or undone, which is thin for a 17-param destructive tool.

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?

Two tightly written sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the scope caveat last. No filler, though the brevity is arguably wrong for a tool of this complexity (a completeness issue, not a conciseness one).

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?

For a destructive, 17-parameter mutation tool with 6% schema coverage, the description leaves most parameters and most behavioral risk unexplained. An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but the parameter and safety picture is largely absent.

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?

Schema coverage is only 6% (just the 'document' parameter is documented), so nearly all 16 remaining parameters carry no meaning in either the schema or the description. The description merely implies 'optional creation' (create_missing) and 'rollback preview' (dry_run) without mapping them to parameters, leaving the burden unmet.

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 and resource: aligning host grids and levels to a loaded link. It is distinguishable from the sibling revit_compare_link_datums by the verb 'align' versus 'compare', though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

'with optional creation and rollback preview' implies the dry-run path, and 'Does not create a monitor relationship' is a useful scope boundary. However, no alternative tool is named and no when-to-use trigger (e.g. prefer compare first, or when a monitor is desired) is given, so usage is only implied.

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

Deploy Server