civilquants

Compute Bored Pile Retaining Wall BoQ

compute_bored_pile_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. Cast-in-place bored concrete pile retaining wall, the SEVENTH member of the wall family and the FIFTH of the retaining_walls L1 leaf. The SIXTH structural system in the retaining / earth-structures domain (after mass concrete / RC / steel / mesh-and-stone / reinforced-soil-with-facing). Four structural forms via the bored_pile_form discriminator: CONTIGUOUS (clear-spaced piles, shotcrete face), SECANT_HARD_SOFT (alternating soft/hard overlapping piles, intermediate watertightness), SECANT_HARD_HARD (overlapping RC piles, maximum watertightness; deep basements), and KING_POST_AND_LAGGING_RC (widely-spaced RC king posts with lagging panels). 18th use of the classed-then-legacy attribute discrimination pattern, applied via the CONCRETE_REINFORCED handler's new wall_type='bored_pile' branch for the capping beam (when included). Routes via five new WorkCategory entries (BORED_PILE_CONCRETE, BORED_PILE_BORE, BORED_PILE_NR, BORED_PILE_HEAD_PREP, BORED_PILE_INTERLOCK) covering the CESMM4 Class P §P.8 three-line cast-in-place pile measurement convention plus the Class Q ancillaries head-prep line and the secant-specific interlock line. Codes: CESMM4 P.8.1-4 + Q.1.1, NRM2 7.6.1-4 + 7.5.1, MMHW 1600.5-6 (SHW Cl. 1602/1603), and SMM7 D30.1-5 — D30 (Cast in place piling) is OPENED at this session as the conventional UK QS named home. Capping beam routes via CONCRETE_REINFORCED with wall_type='bored_pile' to F.6.5 / 11.3.5 / 1700.4.4 / E10.3.4. Reinforcement billed itemised (separate audit line per BS 8666:2020 cage) on top of the pile rate by S31 decision. Eight variant presets exercise all four BoredPileForm values (2/2/2/2 split). Example params: wall_length_m=20 m (5–200), retained_height_m=6 m (2–20), embedment_below_formation_m=4 m (1–15). Example call: {"params": {"wall_length_m": 20, "retained_height_m": 6, "embedment_below_formation_m": 4}, "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).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`params`	Yes	Parameter form for a bored pile retaining wall. A single dataclass that — through combinations of its fields and the ``bored_pile_form`` discriminator — produces all eight VARIANT_PRESETS plus arbitrary user-specified geometries across all four BoredPileForm options. Sensible defaults yield a 6m basement-wall CONTIGUOUS bored pile wall.
`standard`	No		MMHW
`output_mode`	No		full_json
`deliverables`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses authentication requirement and error behavior (TIER_INSUFFICIENT), output formats (xlsx, dxf, pdf), and defaults behavior. Adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by detailing access constraints and deliverable options.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

Overly verbose; includes extraneous taxonomy details about structural families (SEVENTH member, FIFTH leaf) and coding references that are not needed for an AI agent. Core information should be more front-loaded and concise.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Provides a good overview of the tool's complexity, structural forms, and deliverables, but lacks detailed descriptions for many parameters. Adequate for a complex tool given presence of output schema and default parameter values.

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?

Adds meaning with example parameter ranges (wall_length_m, retained_height_m, embedment_below_formation_m) and explanations of the bored_pile_form enum. However, schema coverage is low (25%) and many parameters remain undescribed; the description partially compensates but is not exhaustive.

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 clearly states the tool computes a BoQ for bored pile retaining walls and distinguishes from the free-tier alternative compute_cantilever_wall. However, the purpose is somewhat buried in verbose taxonomy about structural families and coding references.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on paid tier requirement ('Calling this without an authenticated CivilQuants account returns TIER_INSUFFICIENT'), alternative free tool (compute_cantilever_wall), and gives example parameters and calls. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use but provides sufficient context.

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?