Snuug room calculators

Dining table size calculator

dining_table_size

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when someone asks what size dining table fits a room, how many people a table seats, or how big a room must be for a table for a number of people. Uses UK stock table sizes and the space a chair needs behind it.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "dining_table_size"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mode`	No	room (start from the room’s size) or people (start from how many people).	room
`shape`	No	rectangle, round or oval.	rectangle
`people`	No	In people mode: the number of people.
`clearance`	No	The gap behind the chairs: tight, no_traffic (to a wall), edge_past or walk_past (someone passes).	edge_past
`room_width_cm`	No	In room mode: the room’s width (cm).
`room_length_cm`	No	In room mode: the room’s length (cm).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tool`	Yes	The tool, as named in its API and page URLs.
`notes`	Yes	Caveats to pass on with the answer.
`snuug`	Yes	One line about Snuug, the app behind the calculators.
`answer`	Yes	The answer as named values.
`inputs`	Yes	Every input as the tool used it: given, a default, or filled in from the rules.
`sources`	Yes	The sources of the rules used. Every rule cites its source, with the date it was checked.
`summary`	Yes	The answer in one sentence to quote.
`version`	Yes	The version of this contract.
`working`	Yes	How the answer was worked out, one step a line.
`page_url`	Yes	The calculator on snuug.app with these inputs filled in.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context that no annotation carries: results are based on UK stock table sizes and account for the space a chair needs behind the table, which tells the agent the output is opinionated real-world inventory rather than pure geometry.

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?

Two sentences, both earning their place: the first front-loads the trigger conditions, the second supplies the domain assumptions. No filler, no restatement of the tool name or annotations.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and all six parameters are fully described in the schema. The description covers both modes implicitly through its three question forms and discloses the sizing basis; the only gap is that it never signals the people-count ceiling of 14 or the cm-based room bounds, though those live in the schema.

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% and three parameters carry enums with value-level documentation, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description reinforces the chair-space concept, which loosely maps to the 'clearance' parameter, but adds no syntax, units, or mode-switching detail beyond what the schema already states.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description names a specific resource (dining table size) and enumerates the three concrete question forms it answers: table size for a room, seating capacity, and room size needed for N people. This makes it immediately distinguishable from siblings such as sofa_fit, rug_size, or room_size without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It opens with an explicit 'Use when...' clause covering three recognizable user intents, which is strong when-to-use guidance. It stops short of naming a when-not condition or an alternative tool, and there is no mention of the implicit constraint that results are UK-market sizes, which matters if a user asks about US or EU stock.

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

All Snuug room calculators tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?