civilquants

Compute Prefabricated Petrol/Oil Interceptor (Separator) BoQ

compute_petrol_oil_interceptor

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. Prefabricated petrol/oil interceptor (separator) per BS EN 858-1:2002 / BS EN 858-2:2003 and SHW Cl. 519. Catalogue-driven on three axes: Class (1 with coalescer + auto-closure for ≤5 mg/l surface-water discharge, or 2 for ≤100 mg/l foul-sewer discharge), Type (full retention NSF for high-spill-risk forecourts, or bypass NSB for low-spill-risk car parks), and Nominal Size (NS3 to NS100 l/s flow rating — 7 catalogue entries). Composite of the procured interceptor unit (Nr, default supply route CONTRACTOR_INSTALL_PC_SUPPLY for engineer-specified prefab), concrete blinding bedding, granular surround per SHW Cl. 803, geotextile separator, and foundation excavation with optional sheet pile support. Oil storage capacity derived per BS EN 858-2 cl. 4.3.6 (V = NS×10 for full retention, NSB×15 for bypass). Opens drainage_treatment leaf; the canonical pre-treatment for hot-spot catchments draining to soakaway, watercourse, or foul sewer. Routes via CESMM4 K.5.x.n (size-banded), NRM2 33.9.x, MMHW 500.13.x (SHW Cl. 519), SMM7 R12.5.x. Example params: bedding_blinding_thickness_mm=150 mm (100–300), bedding_overhang_m=0.3 m (0.15–0.5), surround_thickness_each_side_m=0.3 m (0.15–0.5). Example call: {"params": {"bedding_blinding_thickness_mm": 150, "bedding_overhang_m": 0.3, "surround_thickness_each_side_m": 0.3}, "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 petrol/oil interceptor installation. Catalogue-driven on three axes: size (NS rating, catalogue lookup for dimensions/mass/silt), class (performance — CLASS_1/CLASS_2), and type (full retention vs bypass).
`standard`	No		MMHW
`output_mode`	No		full_json
`deliverables`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description describes generating deliverables (Excel, DXF, PDF) and opening a drainage_treatment leaf, implying write-side effects or document creation, which contradicts the readOnlyHint annotation indicating a read-only operation.

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?

The description is lengthy but front-loaded with critical access info (paid tier) and structured with technical details, examples, and output options. Some redundancy with schema defaults, but overall efficient.

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 (multiple parameters, standards, output modes, deliverables), the description covers all essential aspects: standards, catalogue selection, engineering assumptions, output options, and example usage. Output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed.

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 description coverage, the description compensates well by explaining the three catalogue axes (size, class, type), providing example parameters and an example call, and clarifying 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 computes a BoQ for a prefabricated petrol/oil interceptor, specifying standards (BS EN 858, SHW) and differentiating from sibling compute_manhole 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 paid-tier requirement, returns TIER_INSUFFICIENT error without authentication, and recommends free-tier alternative compute_manhole. Provides clear context on when to use this tool.

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?