Skip to main content
Glama
using76
by using76

bulc_load_evac_result

Load evacuation simulation results from .evac files for visualization and analysis in building design workflows.

Instructions

Load evacuation results from a .evac file for visualization.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
evacPathNoPath to .evac file. Default: auto-detect from last simulation

Implementation Reference

  • Handler implementation for the bulc_load_evac_result tool. Validates input using LoadEvacResultSchema and forwards the 'load_evac_result' command to the BULC client via getBulcClient().
    case "bulc_load_evac_result": {
      const validated = LoadEvacResultSchema.parse(args);
      result = await client.sendCommand({
        action: "load_evac_result",
        params: validated,
      });
      break;
    }
  • Zod schema defining the input validation for bulc_load_evac_result tool: optional 'evacPath' string parameter.
    const LoadEvacResultSchema = z.object({
      evacPath: z.string().optional(),
    });
  • MCP tool registration object for bulc_load_evac_result, including name, description, input schema, and annotations. This object is part of the exported evacTools array used in the main server.
    {
      name: "bulc_load_evac_result",
      description:
        "Load evacuation results from a .evac file for visualization.",
      inputSchema: {
        type: "object" as const,
        properties: {
          evacPath: {
            type: "string",
            description: "Path to .evac file. Default: auto-detect from last simulation",
          },
        },
      },
      annotations: {
        readOnlyHint: false,
        destructiveHint: false,
      },
    },
  • Top-level tool dispatch handler in main MCP server that routes bulc_load_evac_result (and other evac tools) to the specific handleEvacTool function.
    if (name.startsWith("bulc_") && name.includes("evac")) {
      return await handleEvacTool(name, safeArgs);
    }
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), suggesting a safe operation. The description adds that it loads results 'for visualization', implying it may trigger a viewer or prepare data for display, which is useful context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't detail side effects like whether it overwrites existing loaded results or requires specific file formats, leaving behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Load evacuation results') and purpose ('for visualization'), with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter and clear annotations, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given one parameter with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema and siblings like visualization-related tools, it could better explain the visualization outcome (e.g., whether it opens a viewer or just loads data). The context is incomplete for understanding the full tool behavior in the ecosystem.

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%, with the parameter 'evacPath' fully documented in the schema. The description mentions '.evac file' but doesn't add semantic details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., file format specifics or visualization implications). With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate with extra parameter insights.

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 clearly states the action ('Load evacuation results') and resource ('.evac file'), with the purpose 'for visualization' adding useful context. It distinguishes from siblings like 'bulc_get_evac_result' (which likely retrieves results without loading for visualization) and 'bulc_open_evac_viewer' (which might open a viewer without loading data). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with these specific alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'bulc_get_evac_result' and 'bulc_open_evac_viewer', the description lacks explicit direction on scenarios favoring this tool, such as loading saved results from a file versus fetching current simulation results. Usage is implied through the file-loading context but not articulated.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/using76/BULC_MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server