civilquants

Compute Anchored Retaining Wall BoQ

compute_anchored_wall

Read-only

Paid tier only. Calling this without an authenticated CivilQuants account returns TIER_INSUFFICIENT — sign up at https://civilquants.com/pricing or use the free-tier alternative compute_cantilever_wall. Anchored retaining wall — the only wall family member that pre-stresses the retained soil mass into the wall via post-tensioned ground anchors per BS EN 1537. Three structural variants: in-situ reinforced concrete (INSITU_RC, economic 5-10m); steel king-post-and-lagging (KING_POST, typical 4-8m, often temporary); driven sheet pile (SHEET_PILED, quays/cofferdams/deep basements). Eight VARIANT_PRESETS exercise the 'one parameter form, eight variants, four standards' moat #1 claim across all three structural variants. The in-situ RC body routes via wall_type='anchored' attribute discrimination: CESMM4 F.6.4, NRM2 11.3.4, MMHW 1700.4.3 (SHW Cl. 1709/1710), SMM7 E10.3.3. Ground anchors and stressing route to new specialist handlers (CESMM4 Class C; NRM2 Group 7; MMHW Series 1600; SMM7 D32). King-post sections to CESMM4 P.5 / NRM2 7.3 / MMHW 1600.3 / SMM7 D32; sheet piles to CESMM4 P.4 / NRM2 7.4 / MMHW 1600.4 / SMM7 D31; timber lagging to CESMM4 O.3 / NRM2 16.4 / MMHW 2500.7 / SMM7 G20.1. Example params: stem_height=6 m (2–15), stem_thickness=0.5 m (0–1.5), wall_length=25 m (5–200). Example call: {"params": {"stem_height": 6, "stem_thickness": 0.5, "wall_length": 25}, "standard": "MMHW"}. Omitted parameters use sensible engineering defaults. Pass deliverables=["xlsx","dxf","pdf"] (any subset) to also receive one-shot download URLs in the same call: Excel BoQ (both tiers, watermarked free) plus the dimensioned DXF (CAD) and PDF drawing sheets (paid tier). Pass freeboard (clearance below the wall top, m) instead of the retained-height field to set the retained fill by clearance — the engine back-calculates it as stem − freeboard. Supplying both is rejected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes	Parameter form for an anchored retaining wall. A single dataclass that — through combinations of its fields and the ``wall_form`` discriminator — produces all eight VARIANT_PRESETS plus arbitrary user-specified geometries across all three structural variants (INSITU_RC, KING_POST, SHEET_PILED). Sensible defaults yield a 6m in-situ RC wall with a single row of permanent anchors.
`standard`	No		MMHW
`freeboard`	No
`output_mode`	No		full_json
`deliverables`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses authentication requirement and paid tier restriction. Explains behavior of freeboard parameter. Annotations set readOnlyHint: true, consistent with a computation tool. No contradiction.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

While the description is lengthy, it efficiently packs essential information about variants, standards, parameters, and deliverables. Each sentence adds value, though slight tightening could improve conciseness.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (three structural variants, multiple standards, many parameters), the description is thorough. It covers variants, presets, standard mappings, parameter constraints, and deliverables. Output schema exists for return values.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Adds significant meaning beyond the schema: provides example values with ranges (stem_height=6 m (2–15)), defaults, and relationships (freeboard vs retained_height). The description compensates for the schema's limited descriptions and adds engineering context.

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 clearly states that the tool computes a Bill of Quantities for anchored retaining walls, specifically noting it's the only wall family member with pre-stressed ground anchors. It distinguishes from the sibling tool compute_cantilever_wall by mentioning it as a free-tier alternative.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states it's paid tier only and warns about TIER_INSUFFICIENT error for unauthenticated calls. Provides the free alternative compute_cantilever_wall. Includes example params and an example call. Clarifies when to use freeboard vs retained_height.

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

All civilquants tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes with detailed descriptions, but the large number of closely related structures (e.g., multiple wall types, drainage inlets) could cause some confusion. Descriptions are thorough, mitigating ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

The majority of tools follow a consistent `compute_<noun>` pattern. However, several administrative tools use different verbs (get, list, save, etc.), introducing mild inconsistency.

Tool Count3/5

56 tools is high but defensible given the broad civil engineering domain. The set covers many specific structures and workflows, though some tools could be merged or scoped more tightly.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of common civil engineering tasks (walls, foundations, drainage, pavements, highways, utilities). Minor gaps exist (e.g., no explicit bridge or tunnel tool), but the core domain is well-covered.

Resources

Need Help?