Skip to main content
Glama

Css Length

css_length
Read-onlyIdempotent

Convert one CSS absolute length. An inch is 96px and 2.54 cm, so a centimetre is 4800/127 px, a millimetre is 480/127 px, and Q (a quarter-millimetre) is 120/127 px. A point is 4/3 px and a pica is 16px. Units: px, in, cm, mm, Q, pt, pc. em, rem, percent and viewport units are rejected. Exact rationals, 12 decimal places. Price: $0.001 USDC per successful call (x402, Solana). Same tool over HTTPS: GET https://scorptech.it.com/api/x402/v1/css-length

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "value": "<value>"
    },
    "name": "css_length"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
valueYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context: exact rational arithmetic, 12 decimal places, x402 pricing, and an HTTPS endpoint alternative.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the description is generally efficient. The conversion-factor details are useful but slightly verbose for invocation guidance, keeping it below maximum conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter converter, the description covers units, rejected inputs, precision, cost, and endpoint. It still leaves output format and conversion target ambiguous, and no output schema exists to compensate.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the single value parameter. It lists accepted and rejected units, which helps, but it does not specify the input string format (for example, whether the value must include a unit suffix) or the target unit.

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 names a specific verb and resource: converting a CSS absolute length. It clearly scopes the tool to absolute units and rejects relative/viewport units, which distinguishes it from generic converters and related CSS unit tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly says the tool handles absolute CSS lengths and rejects em, rem, percent, and viewport units. However, it does not explicitly point to sibling tools such as unit_convert or css_angle for alternative cases.

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.

Resources