Skip to main content
Glama

civilquants

Compute Open Ditch (drainage channel) BoQ

compute_ditch
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_manhole. Linear primary measurement of an open earthwork drainage channel — trapezoidal cross-section, four lining variants (unlined / geotextile / granular / concrete). Routes via CESMM4 Class E.4 (excavation for cuttings), NRM2 Group 34.10 (site works: open drains and ditches), MMHW Series 500.4 (SHW Cl. 514 Earthwork ditches and drains), SMM7 R13.4 (Land Drainage — ditches). Eight variant presets cover all four lining types x two characteristic size scenarios each. Unit: M. Second member of the drainage_ancillaries L2 leaf (opened at S32 with connection_to_existing). 20th use of the classed-then-legacy attribute discrimination pattern via the lining_type discriminator. The four standards genuinely diverge on which work-section heading owns ditches (Class E vs Group 34 vs Series 500 vs R13) — the platform renders all four honestly from one source WorkItem. Example params: run_length_m=100 m (1–1000), top_width_mm=1700 mm (200–10000), bottom_width_mm=500 mm (100–5000). Example call: {"params": {"run_length_m": 100, "top_width_mm": 1700, "bottom_width_mm": 500}, "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
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYesParameters for a single open-ditch primary measurement. The geometry is a trapezoidal cross-section run linearly along the ditch alignment. side_slope_h_per_v is the side slope expressed as horizontal-per-vertical (1.0 = 45 deg, 1.5 = ~34 deg, 0.5 = ~63 deg).
standardNoMMHW
output_modeNofull_json
deliverablesNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true. The description adds concrete details: authentication requirement, tier insufficiency error, and behavior of deliverables (one-shot download URLs). 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.

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is verbose, including extensive standards references and variant presets that may not be essential for an AI agent to select the tool. However, it is front-loaded with key info (paid tier, purpose).

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?

Covers purpose, constraints, alternatives, examples, and deliverables option. Output schema exists, so no need to detail return values. Provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is low (25%). The description adds value by detailing parameter ranges (e.g., run_length_m 1-1000) and explaining side_slope_h_per_v meaning. It also notes that omitted parameters use engineering defaults.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Linear primary measurement of an open earthwork drainage channel' and outputs a BoQ. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning it's the second member of the drainage_ancillaries leaf and contrasts with the free-tier alternative compute_manhole.

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 paid-tier requirement, provides sign-up link, and directs to free alternative compute_manhole. Also gives example parameters and a sample call, plus notes on omitted parameters using defaults.

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

Try in Browser

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