Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

View Info

revit_view_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect a Revit view to get its template, display, categories, worksets, filters, and links. Verify completeness by checking the skipped list; a non-empty list means incomplete results.

Instructions

Inspect one view's template, display, categories, worksets, filters and links. A non-empty skipped list means the result is incomplete; skippedCount counts all skipped entries.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`view`	Yes	Exact non-template view name from revit_list_views, or a view ID as a decimal string.
`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.

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"
```

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"
```

changedInput schema / properties / view / description

Previous value: -"Required exact, case-sensitive non-template view name from revit_list_views, or its Revit view ID as a decimal string; no default. An exact name takes precedence over interpreting a numeric string as an ID."New value: +"Exact non-template view name from revit_list_views, or a view ID as a decimal string."

removedInput schema / properties / view / title
```
Removed value: -"View"
```

removedInput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_view_infoArguments"

removedOutput schema / title

Removed value: -"revit_view_infoDictOutput"

Addedv0.7.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add what they don't cover. It does exactly that by explaining the skipped-list contract: a non-empty skipped list means the result is incomplete and skippedCount tallies all skipped entries. No permission, timing, or failure-mode context beyond that, but the important caveat is disclosed.

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 dense sentences with zero filler, and the capability statement is front-loaded ahead of the result-caveat sentence. Nothing repeats the schema or annotations.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it still adds the skipped/skippedCount caveat that clarifies result completeness. Only the absence of any relationship to the overlapping view-inspection siblings keeps it short of full completeness.

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 100% and all five parameters (view, document, process_id, timeout_seconds, pickup_timeout_seconds) are described in the schema, including precedence between process_id and document. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

It names a specific verb and resource ('Inspect one view's') and enumerates exactly what facets are returned: template, display, categories, worksets, filters and links. It never differentiates itself from the sibling revit_view_summary, so an agent must infer which inspector to pick, but the scope is otherwise 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 guidance and no reference to alternatives, even though revit_view_summary, revit_view_elements, revit_view_warnings and revit_list_views all overlap in the view-inspection space. The only routing hint ('from revit_list_views') lives in the schema, not the description.

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

Deploy Server