Skip to main content
Glama

meskeIA MCP

by com.meskeia

calcular_astrofoto_exposicion

Read-only

Calcula el tiempo máximo de exposición sin estelas de estrellas para astrofotografía. Usa la fórmula NPF (precisa, tiene en cuenta pixel pitch y declinación) y la regla 500/300. Evalúa si el tiempo elegido producirá estrellas puntuales, microestelas o star trails.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sensorYesTipo de sensor: ff = Full Frame, apsc15 = APS-C Nikon/Sony (×1,5), apsc16 = APS-C Canon (×1,6), m43 = Micro 4/3 (×2,0)
aperturaYesApertura del diafragma en valor f (ej. 2.8 para f/2.8)
focal_mmYesFocal de la lente en milímetros (ej. 14 para un gran angular de 14mm)
megapixelesYesResolución del sensor en megapíxeles (ej. 24 para 24 MP, 45 para 45 MP)
tiempo_elegido_sYesTiempo de exposición que quieres evaluar, en segundos (ej. 20 para 20 segundos)
declinacion_gradosYesDeclinación de la zona del cielo en grados (0 = ecuador celeste, 90 = polo celeste). Para la Vía Láctea usa entre 0-30. Para Polaris usa ~89.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's disclosure of calculation behavior is consistent and adds value by detailing the formulas and evaluation criteria. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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 calculator with no output schema, the description explains what the tool evaluates (point stars, microstreaks, star trails) and the formulas used. It could specify the exact return format, but overall it is sufficiently complete given the tool's complexity.

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 100%, so the schema adequately describes each parameter. The description adds context about the formulas used but does not provide additional per-parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 calculates maximum exposure time without star trails using NPF and 500/300 rules, and evaluates a chosen exposure. It specifically targets astrophotography and distinguishes from sibling calculators, which are unrelated.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

While the description explains what the tool does, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives like calcular_exposicion_equivalente. Usage context is implied but not stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All meskeIA MCP toolsInspect
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

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools are cleanly separated by domain and purpose, but a few close pairs exist: calcular_camara_lenta and calcular_regla_180_video both touch the 180° shutter rule, and calcular_pace_running and calcular_prediccion_running both produce race projections. The descriptions are detailed enough to resolve the ambiguity, but misselection is possible if they are not read carefully.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent Spanish verb_noun snake_case pattern, with calcular_ dominating and the other verbs (convertir_, consultar_, recomendar_, escalar_) used for genuinely different action types. There is no mixed casing or style inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

42 tools is far above the 25+ threshold and the set spans many unrelated domains such as cooking, fitness, photography, vehicles, dates, and finance. While each individual calculator may be useful, the server is not well-scoped and would be much easier to navigate if split into domain-specific MCP servers.

Completeness3/5

Coverage inside each sub-domain is quite thorough, but there are notable gaps: calcular_kilometraje references calcular_irpf, calcular_cuota_autonomo, and comparar_autonomo_vs_sl, none of which exist in this server. These dangling cross-references can lead an agent to attempt calling unavailable tools.

Resources