Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Create Wall

revit_create_wall

Destructive

Create a straight wall in a live Revit model by specifying start and end XY points in mm, level, height, and wall type. Use dry_run to preview changes before applying.

Instructions

Create a straight wall on a named level. XY endpoints and height are in mm; a null wall_type uses the first basic type.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`level`	Yes
`end_mm`	Yes
`dry_run`	No
`document`	No	Title or file name substring of the target open document; needed when several are open.
`start_mm`	Yes
`height_mm`	No
`wall_type`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed10 schema fields changedv0.10.0Oct 14, 2026

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 / end_mm / title
```
Removed value: -"End Mm"
```
removedInput schema / properties / height_mm / title
```
Removed value: -"Height Mm"
```
removedInput schema / properties / level / title
```
Removed value: -"Level"
```
removedInput schema / properties / start_mm / title
```
Removed value: -"Start Mm"
```
removedInput schema / properties / wall_type / title
```
Removed value: -"Wall Type"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_create_wallArguments"

removedOutput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_create_wallDictOutput"

Addedv0.7.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: units are mm, and a null wall_type silently falls back to the first basic type. However, it says nothing about the dry_run flag, which is the key safety affordance for a destructive creation tool.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded before the unit and default-type caveats.

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

Completeness3/5

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 no explanation, and the essential geometry/units are covered. But for a destructive 7-parameter mutation tool, the undocumented dry_run flag and the multi-document selection requirement leave meaningful gaps.

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 description coverage is only 14% (just the document param), so the description carries real weight and does explain start_mm/end_mm as XY in mm, height in mm, and the null wall_type fallback. It leaves dry_run's meaning and the level-matching semantics of the 'level' string unexplained, so compensation is partial.

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 ('Create a straight wall'), plus the placement constraint (on a named level) and unit conventions. It does not distinguish itself from the closest sibling, revit_walls_from_cad, which also produces walls, 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.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this over revit_walls_from_cad, revit_place_family, or batch alternatives, and no statement of prerequisites such as which document must be active. Usage is only implied by the verb.

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

Deploy Server