Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Shared Coordinates

revit_shared_coordinates

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read Revit project and survey coordinates, including base points, survey points, active site, project locations, and link offsets in mm/degrees to verify model positioning.

Instructions

Read project and survey coordinates: base and survey points, active site, project locations and link offsets (mm, degrees). Lists are capped at 100 with total counts. A non-empty skipped list means the result is incomplete; skippedCount counts all skipped entries.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`document`	No	Title or file name substring of the target document; needed when several Revit instances run.
`process_id`	No	Revit process ID; takes precedence over document.
`timeout_seconds`	No	Seconds to wait for a result (default 120).
`pickup_timeout_seconds`	No	Seconds to wait for the add-in to pick up the job (default 300); unused over HTTP.

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 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"
```

changedInput schema / properties / pickup_timeout_seconds / description

Previous 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."New value: +"Seconds to wait for the add-in to pick up the job (default 300); unused over HTTP."

removedInput schema / properties / pickup_timeout_seconds / title
```
Removed value: -"Pickup Timeout Seconds"
```

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"
```

changedInput schema / properties / timeout_seconds / description

Previous 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."New value: +"Seconds to wait for a result (default 120)."

removedInput schema / properties / timeout_seconds / title
```
Removed value: -"Timeout Seconds"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_shared_coordinatesArguments"

removedOutput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_shared_coordinatesDictOutput"

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

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavioral context beyond that: results are capped at 100, total counts are provided, and a non-empty skipped list signals an incomplete result with skippedCount tallying the omissions. That pagination/truncation semantics is exactly the kind of detail structured fields don't 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the truncation behavior. Units are parenthetically packed without excess. Nothing is wasted, though it is slightly terse on the operational side.

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-value structure need not be re-explained. For a read-only tool whose annotations carry the safety profile, the addition of list-cap and skipped-entry semantics makes the definition complete enough for an agent to call correctly. Only usage routing against siblings remains unaddressed.

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 all four parameters are already documented in the schema, making a baseline of 3 appropriate. The description's unit hints (mm, degrees) pertain to output values rather than the parameters, so it adds no meaning about document/process_id/timeout selection beyond what the schema supplies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("Read project and survey coordinates") and enumerates what is returned: base/survey points, active site, project locations, and link offsets. This is clearly distinguishable from the compare/align link-datum siblings, which mutate or diff rather than read. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no named alternatives, and no prerequisites stated. The only implied usage is that reading coordinates is what this tool does. An agent gets no help deciding between this and revit_compare_link_datums or revit_align_link_datums.

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

Deploy Server