BusCalc — Business & Trade Calculations

Fuel and currency purchase cost calculations

buscalc_reference_price_calculations

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate fleet/driving/measured fuel plus separately counted idle or generator consumption, price sensitivity and total period cost; or currency-converted purchase cost including explicit markup and fees. Uses supplied figures only. Fetch references separately, then pass the selected rate/price explicitly. Results include units, formula, limitations and replayable receipt. Put tool fields inside inputs. Supply units or modelVersion only when listed in inputSchema. Follow its required fields and exact choices. Do not pass the REST calculator field inside MCP arguments.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "inputs": {
        "mode": "fuel",
        "figures": {
          "mpg": 25,
          "burn": 0,
          "other": 0,
          "price": 4,
          "gallons": 0,
          "distance": 100,
          "vehicles": 1,
          "idleHours": 0,
          "alternative": 4.5
        }
      }
    },
    "name": "buscalc_reference_price_calculations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`units`	No
`inputs`	Yes
`modelVersion`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`units`	No
`inputs`	Yes
`receipt`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`sourceURL`	Yes
`calculator`	Yes
`modelVersion`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's added value is in disclosing that results include units, formula, limitations, and a replayable receipt, plus that no live data is fetched. That is meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not discuss precision, rounding, or error behavior for invalid figures.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded in a single dense sentence, but the remainder is a run-on sequence of imperative fragments, some of which are low-value boilerplate ('Follow its required fields and exact choices'). No sentence is wrong, but several could be merged or dropped without losing information.

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?

For a tool with a oneOf two-mode nested schema and an output schema, the description covers mode selection, the supplied-figures-only constraint, the reference-fetching workflow, and the inputs-wrapping convention. Return values need not be described because an output schema exists. The remaining gap is the semantics of the 'units' object, which neither schema nor description explains.

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?

Reported top-level schema coverage is 0%, but the description partially compensates by explaining the nesting rule ('Put tool fields inside inputs') and the conditional fields ('Supply units or modelVersion only when listed in inputSchema'), which the schema itself leaves undescribed. The nested figures fields are individually documented in the schema, so the description need not repeat them. It never explains what 'units' accepts or why modelVersion is pinned to 1.0.0, leaving a real gap.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description names two concrete calculation families with specific inputs: fuel cost (fleet/driving/measured fuel plus idle or generator consumption, price sensitivity, total period cost) and currency-converted purchase cost (markup and fees). The verb 'calculate' plus the resource 'cost' is unambiguous, and the two modes are separated with 'or'. It stops short of naming a sibling tool for the alternative reference-fetching path, so differentiation is implied rather than explicit.

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?

'Uses supplied figures only. Fetch references separately, then pass the selected rate/price explicitly' gives a clear when-to-use boundary versus reference-lookup tools and tells the agent to source values elsewhere first. 'Do not pass the REST calculator field inside MCP arguments' is an explicit exclusion. There is no guidance on choosing between the fuel and fx modes beyond the figures the caller already has.

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

All BusCalc — Business & Trade Calculations tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?