Revit Model MCP

by sharafutdinovdi

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Local

Model Health Check

revit_model_health

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read Revit model quality counts before export or hand-over to surface file size, unit settings, and top warning groups.

Instructions

Read model quality counts before an export or hand-over.

Returns data with project metadata, file size in bytes, counts, unit settings and the ten most frequent warning groups. Absent objects have zero counts; unavailable metrics are null and described in top-level skipped entries. Use revit_list_warnings to inspect affected elements. A missing active document, overall read failure or timeout raises an error; timeout partials are not returned.

If more than one Revit instance is running, document is required; otherwise any instance may respond. Non-empty skipped means the answer is incomplete; skippedCount includes entries beyond the first 100.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`document`	No	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.
`process_id`	No	Exact positive Revit process ID. Takes precedence over document; if both are supplied they must agree.
`timeout_seconds`	No	Positive integer seconds to wait for a result after pickup (120 when omitted); HTTP uses this as its response budget. Expiry raises an error, and increasing it does not override the add-in's execution limits.
`pickup_timeout_seconds`	No	Positive integer seconds to wait for the add-in to pick up a local or SSH job (300 when omitted); ignored over HTTP. A pickup timeout raises an error but the pending job may still execute later.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.7.0Sep 30, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / document / description

Previous value: -"Case-insensitive substring of the target active document title or file name; default null leaves requests unaddressed, so any instance may respond. Use a unique substring with multiple instances; revit_list_instances instead returns all matching instances, or all instances when omitted."New 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."

addedInput schema / properties / process_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Exact positive Revit process ID. Takes precedence over document; if both are supplied they must agree.",
+  "title": "Process Id"
+}

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.1Sep 15, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / document / description

Added value: +"Case-insensitive substring of the target active document title or file name; default null leaves requests unaddressed, so any instance may respond. Use a unique substring with multiple instances; revit_list_instances instead returns all matching instances, or all instances when omitted."

addedInput schema / properties / pickup_timeout_seconds / description

Added value: +"Positive integer seconds to wait for the add-in to pick up a local or SSH job (300 when omitted); ignored over HTTP. A pickup timeout raises an error but the pending job may still execute later."

addedInput schema / properties / timeout_seconds / description

Added value: +"Positive integer seconds to wait for a result after pickup (120 when omitted); HTTP uses this as its response budget. Expiry raises an error, and increasing it does not override the add-in's execution limits."

First observedSep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses that absent objects report zero, unavailable metrics are null and surfaced in skipped entries, that missing document/read failure/timeout raise errors with no timeout partials, and that document is required when multiple instances run. This is exactly the behavioral context annotations alone would not convey.

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?

Front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, then layers return shape, error behavior, and multi-instance/skipped caveats. Mostly efficient, though the final paragraph packs several distinct caveats into a dense run-on.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Even with an output schema present, the description covers error conditions, partial-result semantics, skipped-count truncation, and multi-instance behavior, leaving no material gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including the document/process_id precedence and timeout semantics. The description adds only a marginal restatement of the multi-instance document requirement, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource ('Read model quality counts') and enumerates the return contents (project metadata, file size, counts, unit settings, top warning groups). It differentiates from revit_list_warnings but does not distinguish itself from other read-oriented siblings like revit_model_snapshot or revit_document_info.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear usage context ('before an export or hand-over') and names an alternative with its condition ('Use revit_list_warnings to inspect affected elements'). No explicit when-not guidance, but the context for selection is clear.

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

Deploy Server