civilquants

Compute Precast Concrete Monolithic Manhole BoQ

compute_manhole_precast

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. Fully monolithic precast concrete circular manhole comprising factory-cast base + bottom ring + integral benching + pre-formed channel as a single delivered unit (BS 5911-3), with stacked precast chamber rings, optional reducing slab and access shaft, precast cover slab, ductile-iron frame and cover (BS EN 124 loading classes), step irons cast into rings, granular or concrete bedding, granular surround, geotextile separator, and excavation. Catalogue-driven sizing from PMC_1200 (1200mm ID) to PMC_2400 (2400mm ID). Routes via manhole_type=precast_monolithic attribute discrimination through CESMM4 Class K.1.2.x, NRM2 33.7.5, MMHW 500.5.5-.8 (SHW Cl. 507), and SMM7 R12.3.1.x. Example params: invert_depth=3.5 m (0.5–12), bedding_thickness_mm=150 mm (100–300), bedding_overhang_m=0.15 m (0.1–0.3). Example call: {"params": {"invert_depth": 3.5, "bedding_thickness_mm": 150, "bedding_overhang_m": 0.15}, "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 fully monolithic precast concrete manhole. Catalogue-driven: pick a ``size`` and the chamber's nominal dimensions, masses, and ring heights are read from ``_CATALOGUE``. Override individual fields if a specific manufacturer differs.
`standard`	No		MMHW
`output_mode`	No		full_json
`deliverables`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Discloses authentication requirements (paid tier), default parameter behavior, and one-shot delivery of downloadable files (Excel, DXF, PDF). No contradiction with readOnlyHint annotation, as the tool is a stateless computation generating results, not mutating external state.

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, covering paid tier warning, construction details, standards, example parameters, and deliverables in a single block. While informative, it could be more concise (e.g., separating authentication guidance from parameter details).

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple standards, nested params, deliverables), the description provides adequate context: purpose, usage caveats, example call, and output options. With an output schema present (as per context signals), it does not need to detail return values.

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?

With only 25% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining catalogue-driven sizing (PMC_1200–PMC_2400), giving example parameters with ranges, and noting that omitted parameters use sensible defaults. However, not all 20+ parameters are individually clarified, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

Description explicitly defines the tool as computing a BoQ for a precast monolithic manhole, details the construction type (BS 5911-3), and contrasts with sibling 'compute_manhole' for free-tier alternative. The verb 'compute' and resource 'manhole precast' are specific and differentiated.

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?

Clearly states 'Paid tier only' and directs users to the free alternative 'compute_manhole' if they lack an authenticated CivilQuants account. Provides example parameters and standards (e.g., MMHW), giving agents clear context for invocation.

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?