civilquants

Compute Utility Kiosk Base BoQ

compute_utility_kiosk_base

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. Foundation + kiosk hardware composite for utility cabinets — LV electricity feeder pillars (DNO-supplied), Openreach FTTC cabinets (PIA-supplied), EV rapid-charging plinths, packaged DNO substations, and generic precast plinths. Light-wrapper delegation around pad_foundation for the substructure (excavation, RC pad with pedestal, reinforcement), plus kiosk-specific PC-supply hardware (1 complete unit on UPS route, 4 components — body / door / lock / base-plate — on Employer-PC route). Catalogue-driven supply-route defaults encode that LV pillars and FTTC cabinets are normally utility-provider-supplied complete units, while EV chargers, DNO substations, and generic plinths are normally Employer-PC-nominated per component. Example params: quantity=1 Nr (1–100), blinding_thickness_m=0.075 m (0.05–0.15), working_space_m=0.3 m (0–1). Example call: {"params": {"quantity": 1, "blinding_thickness_m": 0.075, "working_space_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	Parameters for a utility kiosk base. Fields marked "(None → catalogue)" resolve from the catalogue entry at ``__post_init__`` time; an explicit non-None value always wins.
`standard`	No		MMHW
`output_mode`	No		full_json
`deliverables`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Discloses paid-tier requirement, delegation to pad_foundation, and catalogue-driven defaults. Does not contradict readOnlyHint annotation. Adds value beyond annotations by explaining the composite structure and engineering defaults.

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 and contains multiple technical sentences. While front-loaded with critical info, it could be more concise without losing essential 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?

For a complex tool with many parameters and a nested input schema, the description covers usage, defaults, output options, and sibling alternatives. Output schema exists so return values are not required. Adequately complete.

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?

Describes key parameters (quantity, blinding_thickness_m, working_space_m) with example ranges and explains kiosk_type enum values. Adds meaning beyond the schema, though not all parameters are covered.

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 it computes a Bill of Quantities for utility kiosk bases, listing the specific kiosk types it covers. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning 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-only and provides a free alternative. Offers example parameters and call, explains defaults, and describes how to request deliverables. Gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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?