MCP server for any AutoLISP-capable CAD - AI drafting AND design review with 128 tools: 2D + 3D solids, STL, assemblies, interference/overhang checks. BricsCAD on Linux is the reference adapter. No COM, no SDK.
The server exposes only ONE tool ('traps'), which is a read-only resource delivery mechanism, not an actionable tool. The tool itself lacks a proper input schema, parameter descriptions, and structured output documentation. The server's actual CAD functionality (128 tools mentioned in pyproject.toml) is NOT exposed through the MCP interface, it is implemented in AutoLISP bridge code (bridge/mcp_bridge.lsp) but not registered as MCP tools in server.py. Only 'traps' is registered via @mcp.resource(), which returns unstructured markdown text rather than a composable tool response. This is a critical architectural gap: the server advertises 128 CAD tools but exposes zero of them to MCP clients. The single exposed 'tool' is effectively a static documentation fetch, not a real tool.
Hard-won failure modes of driving this CAD: read before a long session.
CRITICAL: 128 CAD tools advertised in pyproject.toml are not registered as MCP tools. Only 'traps' (a read-only resource) is exposed. All actual CAD operations (drawing, boolean operations, measurements, etc.) exist only in AutoLISP bridge code and are not composable via the MCP protocol.
No input schema defined for 'traps' tool. The @mcp.resource() decorator registers it as a resource, not a tool with parameters. There are no required or optional parameters, no type definitions, and no parameter descriptions.
Output schema not documented. 'traps' returns raw markdown text (unstructured string). LLMs need to parse freeform markdown to extract guidance, which is error-prone and wastes tokens. Should return structured JSON with sections (trap_name, description, severity, mitigation).
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-22 | F | 34 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
Tool description is minimal (65 chars). While grammatically correct, it does not explain WHEN to call this tool, WHAT problem it solves, or how it relates to the 128 missing CAD tools. Should clarify: 'Returns hard-won failure modes and pitfalls learned from CAD operations, read this before starting a modeling session to avoid costly mistakes.'
Architectural mismatch: server claims to be a 128-tool CAD MCP server but only exposes 1 read-only documentation resource. Clients expecting composable tools (draw, measure, boolean, export) will find nothing. The bridge code exists but is not integrated into the MCP interface.