meskeIA MCP

calcular_combustible

Read-only

Calculadora de combustible con dos modos: (1) consumo: dado un trayecto real (km recorridos + litros gastados), calcula el consumo en L/100km, el coste por km y la autonomía con 50€. (2) viaje: dada la distancia de un trayecto y el consumo medio del vehículo, calcula los litros necesarios y el coste total del viaje.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`modo`	Yes	consumo = calcular consumo real de un trayecto ya hecho \| viaje = estimar coste de un trayecto futuro
`litros`	No	(Modo consumo) Litros gastados en ese trayecto
`kilometros`	No	(Modo consumo) Kilómetros recorridos en el trayecto de referencia
`distanciaKm`	No	(Modo viaje) Distancia del trayecto en kilómetros
`consumoL100km`	No	(Modo viaje) Consumo medio del vehículo en litros cada 100 km
`precioCombustible`	Yes	Precio del combustible en €/litro (ej: 1.65 para 1,65 €/L)

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description aligns by describing pure calculations. It adds value by detailing the computed outputs for each mode (L/100km, cost per km, autonomy, liters needed, total cost), which is beyond what annotations convey. 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-loads the mode summary, and wastes no words. Every sentence contributes value, making it highly efficient.

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?

Given 6 parameters, 2 required, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the two modes and what each computes. It could hint at the output format (e.g., returning numbers), but the calculator nature makes it reasonable. Overall complete for its 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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description adds context by explaining the two modes and their associated parameters (litros+kilometros for consumo, distanciaKm+consumoL100km for viaje), but does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions.

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's a fuel calculator with two distinct modes (consumption and trip), and its verb 'calcular' combined with 'combustible' distinguishes it from sibling calculators like 'calcular_imc' or 'calcular_porcentaje'.

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?

The description explains when to use each mode: consumption for a real trip already taken, trip for estimating a future trip. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives.

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

All meskeIA MCP 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

A3.8/5.0

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

Need Help?