Revit Model MCP

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

View Summary

revit_view_summary

Read-onlyIdempotent

Read element categories and counts for a selected Revit view, returning header metadata and category details to quickly assess view content before querying individual elements.

Instructions

Read element categories and counts for a selected view.

Returns data with header metadata and categories containing count and differentTypes; an empty view returns categories=[]. Prefer this tool for view counts; select relevant categories before calling revit_view_elements for individual rows. A missing document, unknown or unsupported view, read failure or timeout raises an error; partial data is not returned.

If more than one Revit instance is running, document is required; otherwise any instance may respond.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`view`	Yes	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.
`document`	No	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.
`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.

Changed4 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."

addedInput schema / properties / view / description

Added 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."

First observedSep 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: the return shape ('header metadata and categories containing count and differentTypes'), empty-view behavior ('categories=[]'), error conditions ('missing document, unknown or unsupported view, read failure or timeout raises an error'), and the promise that 'partial data is not returned.' This is rich and non-contradictory context.

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?

The description is compact yet packs several key facts into a short paragraph: primary purpose, return shape, empty-view behavior, usage priority, error behavior, and multi-instance routing. It is front-loaded with the action and adds detail in logical order without redundancy or filler.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values in depth, yet it still covers the essential elements: what the tool does, when to use it, empty-view behavior, failure modes, and instance routing. For a read-only, idempotent tool with full schema coverage, nothing critical is missing.

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%, so the schema already fully documents all four parameters. The description's only parameter-related addition is the multi-instance note about document, which largely restates the schema's own document description. No new semantic value is added beyond the structured parameter definitions, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description begins with a clear verb+resource statement: 'Read element categories and counts for a selected view.' It further distinguishes itself from the sibling revit_view_elements by noting that it should be preferred for view counts and that revit_view_elements is for individual rows, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Usage guidance is explicit: 'Prefer this tool for view counts; select relevant categories before calling revit_view_elements for individual rows.' It also provides a conditional rule for multi-instance scenarios ('If more than one Revit instance is running, document is required'), giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context relative to alternatives.

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

Deploy Server