ssap-mcp

Questa pagina in italiano — this document exists in both languages. English is the working language here; the Italian page is a real translation, not a generated one.

📖 If you are going to read this through an automatic translator, read it on the documentation site instead. Same text, but there the author names are marked so that translators leave them alone. GitHub strips that marking from a README — measured — and a translator then turns Morgenstern-Price into "prezzo Morgentern", as though Price were a price rather than the surname of Vaughan Price. A method by that name does not exist.

An MCP server that drives SSAP2010 — the Slope Stability Analysis Program by Prof. Lorenzo Borselli — so that an AI assistant can prepare a model, choose the calculation method and the search engine, run the verification and read the resulting factor of safety.

Not affiliated with the author of SSAP. SSAP2010 is free software by Prof. Lorenzo Borselli (https://www.ssap.eu), it is not open source, and its redistribution is not permitted. This repository contains no part of SSAP: it drives a copy that you download and install yourself.

Tested against SSAP's own models. All 20 verification cases in tests/CAMPAGNA.md reach a result — nineteen of them are models shipped with SSAP2010, so anyone who has it installed can repeat the whole campaign and check the numbers. Every factor of safety is read from the final report, and the pairs move as they should: anchors on a rock slope +22.8%, liquefaction −44.2%, one layer taken in total instead of effective stresses −27.5%. Each figure is a single run of a pseudo-random search: the sign and the order of magnitude hold, the last digit does not. Where a comparison is not sound it says so: two of them are marked not valid and one result unexplained, instead of being quietly left out.

⛔ Read this first: this is not a way to run SSAP without a screen

This is the single most important limitation, and the one most easily misunderstood, so it is stated in plain words before anything else.

In computing, a program is called headless when it can run with no screen and nobody watching — you type a command, it works in the background, and it can therefore run on a rented server, inside a container, or overnight on a machine nobody is logged into. SSAP is not such a program, and this server does not make it one.

SSAP is a graphical program. In its public release it has no command line, no batch mode and no scripting interface — verified against the whole 511-page manual of rel. 5.2 and the official website. Consequently this server needs, on the same computer:

• SSAP2010 installed (download it from https://www.ssap.eu);

• a real, logged-in Windows desktop. Not a remote machine with nobody logged in, not a container, not a background service: SSAP's own window must actually exist somewhere on a screen, even if nobody is looking at it;

• administrator rights, for the reason explained in the table below.

So the promise here is "nobody has to sit and click", not "no screen is needed". The two sound similar and are completely different. What disappears is the human operator, not the desktop.

One thing it deliberately does not do: it never simulates mouse clicks or keystrokes. The four operations that must go through SSAP's window (load model, load settings, start verification, produce report) are performed by sending Windows messages directly to the buttons (PostMessage/BM_CLICK). Your mouse, your keyboard and your active window remain yours while a verification is running — you can keep working on something else.

Related MCP server: pyNastran MCP Server

How it works

The idea that makes this possible: SSAP is instructed through its files, not through its menus. The calculation method and the search engine are stored as plain text inside the .PAR settings file. They can be written there directly, and SSAP obeys what it finds. The window is only used to press start.

create_model  →  set_analysis_options  →  run_verification  →  read_report
   .MOD/.DAT/.GEO     writes the .PAR       runs SSAP          Fs + which method
                                                               was really used

⛔ Never trust the file you wrote — always check the report SSAP wrote back. If you put a value SSAP does not accept into the .PAR, it is ignored in silence: no error message, no warning, and the verification runs with something other than what you asked for. read_report therefore extracts the METODO DI CALCOLO and MOTORE DI RICERCA lines from the final report, which are the only trustworthy statement of what was actually used. Reading it back is not a formality: it is the only way to know.

⛔ The .tmp files and temp_*.dxf are not the results. They are snapshots taken while the computation is still running. On one and the same verification, a temporary file and the final report differed by 0.018 on Fs. The real report is written only when you ask for it, and only after the computation has finished.

What you need before you start

This is not a program you download and double-click. It is a server that an AI assistant talks to: on its own it has no window, no menu and no command line, and it does nothing until an assistant calls it. Here is the complete chain of things you need, stated in full so that nobody discovers a missing piece halfway through.

⛔ Be clear about the last two rows. Without an MCP client and a model behind it, this repository does nothing whatsoever — there is no interface of its own to fall back on. And if all you want is to run a single verification, SSAP on its own does it better and faster than any of this: it was designed for that, and its own interface is the right tool. This project earns its keep only when you have to run many verifications one after another — every method against every engine, say, or the same slope with twenty parameter sets — or when the verification has to sit inside a longer chain of processing that is already automated.

Dependencies installed automatically: mcp, ezdxf, numpy, laspy, matplotlib.

Install

git clone https://github.com/guidocarieri/ssap-mcp
cd ssap-mcp
uv sync

Then register it with your MCP client (the paths below are examples — use your own):

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ssap": {
      "command": "uv",
      "args": ["--directory", "C:/path/to/ssap-mcp", "run", "ssap-mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Start the client as administrator, so that the server inherits those rights (see the table above for why they are needed). If you would rather not confirm a Windows security prompt at every run, point SSAP_ELEVATED_RUNNER at a helper of your own that executes an elevated PowerShell script — this is optional, and the server works without it.

Environment variables

Tools

These are the operations the assistant can call. Names in code are the ones it uses; you never type them yourself.

Calculation methods and search engines

The numbers in the first column are the codes to pass to set_analysis_options — the same numbers SSAP stores in the .PAR file. They were verified one by one by running each and reading back the method name from the report, because the labels written inside older settings files are wrong.

method — the limit-equilibrium method used to compute Fs:

Note that Sarma I and Sarma II are two different formulations by the same author, published six years apart — the year in the third column is what tells them apart, and they are not interchangeable.

engine — the algorithm that searches for the critical surface:

⚠️ Settings files from older versions declare the wrong ranges. A .PAR produced by SSAP 5.x lists fewer methods and engines than the current program accepts, so its own labels are misleading and cannot be used as a reference. If in doubt, regenerate it: load the .MOD in a current SSAP, save the settings again, and use that file as your template.

What this is for, and what it is not

The manual (§ 2.6.6) advises that a complete and reliable verification may require testing more than one search engine in succession. Done by hand that means one session per engine, and in practice almost nobody does it. Done automatically it costs machine time instead of human time, so running every method against every engine, repeatedly, becomes something you can actually afford to do.

Two warnings that matter more than any of the code:

• Repeating a run is not a luxury. The search for the critical surface is pseudo-random: two identical runs do not return exactly the same number. In this very campaign, two configurations differed by 0.004 — well inside that scatter — which means a single run per configuration cannot tell a real difference from noise. Conclusions drawn from one run have been measured to reverse when repeated.

• Automation does not improve the input. A solver fed with unrealistic parameters returns a perfectly computed, perfectly wrong number — only faster. Deciding the stratigraphy, the strength parameters and the groundwater conditions is the geologist's work, this tool does none of it, and whoever signs the result remains responsible for it.

Credits

SSAP2010 is developed by Prof. Lorenzo Borselli (Instituto de Geología / Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Mexico) and is distributed free of charge at https://www.ssap.eu. All the credit for the analysis itself belongs to him; this repository only automates its operation.

Licence

MIT — see LICENSE. The licence covers this code only, never SSAP.