The SolveCraft project, made public only days ago, is continuing under the name SolidCraft. Its developer is building an open-source parametric CAD system in Rust with desktop and browser interfaces, a command-line client and a built-in MCP server. The rename is more than a label change: the current project page documents 0.2.0 and 0.2.1 packages, broader STEP handling and a much more detailed capability map.

What does the current project actually do?

SolidCraft is built around sketches, geometric constraints and timeline-based features. Users can define dimensions and relationships, then create solids with extrudes, revolves, sweeps, lofts, shells, fillets, holes and patterns. Later features rebuild after a parameter change. This differs from directly pushing triangles in an STL mesh: the aim is to retain design intent and feature history.

The documentation lists assemblies, sheet metal, configurations, material and mass properties, interference checks, and STEP AP203/AP214/AP242 and IGES import. It exports STEP, IGES, 3MF, STL and OBJ. Imported STL and 3MF geometry remains a mesh body; solid features require B-rep geometry. That distinction matters: the program does not claim to turn every mesh automatically into a fully parametric model.

What the 76 reference parts mean

The developer's historical benchmark says 76 reference parts built in Fusion matched their replayed SolidCraft versions in volume, surface area and topology. This is useful regression evidence, not proof of complete CAD equivalence. Equal volume and face count do not establish that every curve, tolerance, assembly relation, drawing annotation or exported PMI is correct. The project page itself states that the test does not establish complete geometric or workflow equivalence.

An earlier 3Druck report counted 328 implemented functions out of 541 targeted Fusion functions. In a fast-moving project that figure is only a snapshot; the current roadmap and open issues are the authoritative coverage record. The software describes itself as early-stage but usable for simple parts.

What MCP-based CAD means

The command-line client can run as an MCP server. A compatible agent may list commands, execute operations, change parameters, request measurements and screenshots, and export files. In the electronics-enclosure demonstration, an agent builds a shell, connector opening and four screw bosses before a user changes width and wall thickness manually.

That does not make a model generated from language automatically manufacturable. The agent calls the same geometric operations as the interface and can still create under-constrained sketches, thin walls, interference or an unsuitable export. Logged commands improve traceability, but requirements, geometry review, slicing and physical trials still require human approval.

Licence and clean-room claim

The source is available under MIT or Apache 2.0. The developer states clean-room rules: Fusion behaviour is observed externally, while Autodesk icons, help text and native Fusion files are excluded from the repository. This is the project's compliance position; LAYERTIMES has not performed an independent legal audit, and similar workflows do not make SolidCraft an Autodesk-endorsed or certified-compatible product.

Who may benefit now?

Developers, educators and experimental automation projects may already find it useful because the source, command layer and browser runtime are inspectable. A production CAD replacement decision should not be based on feature count. Teams need their own reference parts to test import, parametric rebuild, STEP/3MF export, volume and critical dimensions, plus downstream CAM and slicer compatibility.

Editorial conclusion

SolidCraft's most interesting combination is an open parametric core, browser execution and structured automation in one system. Its development speed is also a risk: name, packages and features changed within days. It is best treated today as a developer platform and controlled pilot, not a proven Fusion replacement. Stable file compatibility, a documented regression suite and independent comparison on complex industrial models would be the next meaningful milestones.