Skip to main content
Glama
sharafutdinovdi

Revit Model MCP

by sharafutdinovdi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Change Element Type

revit_change_type
Destructive

Change Revit elements to one compatible type. Family resolves duplicate type names; dry run rolls back; group members are skipped.

Instructions

Change each element to one compatible type; family resolves duplicate type names. dry_run rolls back. Group members are reported in skipped.inGroup; the call is refused if every element is a group member.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
familyNo
dry_runNo
documentNoTitle or file name substring of the target open document; needed when several are open.
type_nameYes
element_idsYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed8 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • 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 / element_ids / title
      Removed value: -"Element Ids"
    • removedInput schema / properties / family / title
      Removed value: -"Family"
    • removedInput schema / properties / type_name / title
      Removed value: -"Type Name"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"revit_change_typeArguments"
    • removedOutput schema / title
      Removed value: -"revit_change_typeDictOutput"
  2. Addedv0.9.1

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: how duplicate type names are resolved via 'family', that dry_run rolls back, that group members land in skipped.inGroup, and that the call is refused if all elements are group members. Annotations only supply the generic destructive/not-idempotent flags; the description supplies the actual mutation semantics.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Density is high; each sentence carries distinct information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be restated, and the description still flags the skipped.inGroup behavior. The main gap is that it never defines what makes a type 'compatible' or what happens on partial failure mid-batch.

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?

Schema coverage is only 20%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'family' (duplicate-name disambiguation) and 'dry_run' (rollback), but says nothing about 'element_ids' semantics, the 'type_name' matching rules, or the 'document' disambiguation parameter. Partial compensation only.

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?

Specific verb+resource+scope: 'Change each element to one compatible type', which distinguishes it from parameter-editing siblings like revit_set_parameter or revit_update_parameters. It does not name an explicit alternative, so it stops 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.

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Gives useful operating conditions (dry_run rolls back, group-member refusal) but never states when to choose this tool over siblings such as revit_set_parameter or revit_load_family. Usage is implied by the mutation scope rather than spelled out.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools