Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Issue Register

revit_issue_register

Read-onlyIdempotent

Create a local .xlsx issue register from Revit issues with element snapshots and review documents; failed snapshots become cell notes.

Instructions

Write a new local .xlsx issue register with element snapshots and review documents. Takes 1 to 60 issues; captures at most 25 snapshots (by severity) within a 210-second budget, and failed snapshots become cell notes. Snapshots need local or SSH transport. Existing output files are refused. A non-empty skipped list means the result is incomplete; skippedCount counts all skipped entries.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`issues`	Yes
`project`	Yes
`document`	No	Title or file name substring of the target document; needed when several Revit instances run.
`pixel_size`	No	PNG size in pixels along the fitted dimension, 32 to 4000 (default 1600); Revit rejects smaller images.
`process_id`	No	Revit process ID; takes precedence over document.
`output_path`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed12 schema fields changedv0.10.0Oct 14, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / document / description

Previous value: -"Case-insensitive substring of the target active document title or file name. Reads require exactly one matching instance; omitted document requires exactly one running instance. Zero or multiple matches fail before publishing. revit_list_instances returns all matching instances, or all running instances when omitted."New value: +"Title or file name substring of the target document; needed when several Revit instances run."

removedInput schema / properties / document / title
```
Removed value: -"Document"
```
removedInput schema / properties / issues / title
```
Removed value: -"Issues"
```
removedInput schema / properties / output_path / title
```
Removed value: -"Output Path"
```

changedInput schema / properties / pixel_size / description

Previous value: -"PNG size in pixels along the fitted image dimension, an integer from 1 to 4000. Default 1600 fits the view at that size while preserving its aspect ratio."New value: +"PNG size in pixels along the fitted dimension, 32 to 4000 (default 1600); Revit rejects smaller images."

changedInput schema / properties / pixel_size / minimum
```
Previous value: -1New value: +32
```
removedInput schema / properties / pixel_size / title
```
Removed value: -"Pixel Size"
```

changedInput schema / properties / process_id / description

Previous value: -"Exact positive Revit process ID. Takes precedence over document; if both are supplied they must agree."New value: +"Revit process ID; takes precedence over document."

removedInput schema / properties / process_id / title
```
Removed value: -"Process Id"
```
removedInput schema / properties / project / title
```
Removed value: -"Project"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_issue_registerArguments"

removedOutput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_issue_registerDictOutput"

Addedv0.9.1Oct 7, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description says the tool writes a new .xlsx file and refuses existing output files, but the annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. Writing a new file modifies the environment and a second run would fail rather than repeat idempotently, directly contradicting the annotations.

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?

The description is dense and front-loaded, packing operational limits and edge cases into about five sentences. It is efficient, though the run-on structure could be organized more scannably.

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?

For a complex write tool with nested parameters and an output schema, the description covers important operational limits and failure behavior. However, it omits parameter details for half the schema and its contradiction with the read-only annotation leaves a critical gap in an agent's understanding.

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 50%, so the description must compensate. It adds the 1–60 issue limit and output-file refusal, which relate to issues and output_path, but it does not explain the project, document, process_id, or pixel_size parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: write a local .xlsx issue register with element snapshots and review documents. It is clear what the tool produces, but it does not differentiate itself from sibling reporting tools such as revit_build_report.

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?

The description implies usage through constraints (1–60 issues, 25 snapshots, local/SSH transport, existing output refused), but it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over alternatives. No when-not guidance or sibling routing is provided.

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

Deploy Server