A 97-step 90 x 144 mm enclosure body built in SolidCraft 0.16/0.18 now fails at DeleteFace1 because a merged-face reference no longer exists as it was picked, and one cut is refused with a 1.7e-5 Bad Gap. Design intent saved as face references breaks across tool versions. Same family as two earlier issues.

Recurring agent failure issue in solidcraft (tangency-labs)

solidcraft (tangency-labs)MCADAgent failureMedium confidence

What engineers report

A recurring agent failure problem in solidcraft (tangency-labs) that mostly hits the mechanical designer.

Failure pattern: validation / failure

Analyst note

From the Grok pain-radar digests, Nov 9-10 2026 (Nov 9 7:41 AM ET through Nov 10 7:41 AM ET digests plus the Haitch editions). Verified live 2026-11-10: issue/PR read; title and state confirmed.

What it costs a team

Modeled annual cost

$30,000

For a team of 5

Prototype delay

3 days

Modeled schedule slip per occurrence

Time lost

240 min

Per engineer per month, about 1 incidents

How the cost is modeled

240 min/month × 5 engineers × 12 months = 240 hours × $125/hour = $30,000

A modeled estimate with medium confidence. Swap in your own team size and loaded rate to size it for your team.

Engineering tools that address it

No engineering tool profile lists this error yet. Browse tools that connect to solidcraft (tangency-labs).

Evidence

  1. 1tangency-labs/solidcraft Issue #14206: 0.40.0-rc.3: a part built in 0.16/0.18 fails at DeleteFace1 (merged-face reference) and one cut is refused with a 1.7e-5 Bad Gapgithub.com

More recurring errors in solidcraft (tangency-labs)

See all 40 solidcraft (tangency-labs) errors

Sourced from public community reports. Costs and delays are modeled estimates, not measurements. Know a better source or a fix? Tell us at hello@productflo.io.