civilquants

Compute Pipework Testing (drainage) BoQ

compute_pipework_testing

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 measurement of testing on new drainage pipework — CCTV survey, air pressure test, water pressure test, or mandrel pull-through. Routes via CESMM4 Class I §I.8 (Tests on new pipework), NRM2 Group 33.18 (Testing of drainage) as priceable lines; via MMHW Series 500.7 (per SHW Cl. 507 deemed included in pipe-run rate) and SMM7 R12.7 (R12 coverage rules deemed included) as zero-priceable annotated lines for tender transparency. Introduces the platform's third named maturity pattern: deemed-included extra-over annotation (joining classed-then-legacy and declared-then-banded). Eight variant presets cover all four test methods x two bore scenarios each. Unit: M. Third member of the drainage_ancillaries L2 leaf. 21st use of the discriminator pattern via test_method. Example params: length_tested_m=100 m (1–2000), diameter_mm=225 mm (100–2400). Example call: {"params": {"length_tested_m": 100, "diameter_mm": 225}, "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	Parameters for a single pipework testing measurement.
`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

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint: true; description adds that it returns deliverables (Excel, DXF, PDF) and can raise TIER_INSUFFICIENT error. Does not contradict annotations and adds useful behavioral context beyond read-only nature.

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?

Front-loaded with critical info (tier restriction, purpose), but the description is verbose. Every sentence adds value, yet could be more streamlined for readability.

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 complexity (multiple standards, four parameters, nested input, various output modes/deliverables), the description is comprehensive. It explains standards, variants, example calls, error conditions, and output formats. Output schema exists but description provides additional context.

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 25% (only test_method has a detailed description). The tool description compensates by explaining the discriminator pattern, eight variant presets, example params with ranges, and default usage info, adding significant meaning.

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 measurement of testing on new drainage pipework (CCTV, air/water pressure, mandrel pull) with specific CESMM4/NRM2/MMHW/SMM7 references. It distinguishes itself as 'third member of the drainage_ancillaries L2 leaf' and '21st use of the discriminator pattern via test_method', setting it apart from siblings.

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 only' and directs free-tier users to 'compute_manhole' as an alternative. Provides examples, parameter defaults, and variant presets, making usage conditions clear.

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?