meskeIA MCP

calcular_temperatura_masa

Read-only

Calcula la temperatura exacta del agua de amasado para alcanzar la DDT (Desired Dough Temperature). Usa la fórmula T_agua = DDT×3 − T_ambiente − T_harina − T_fricción, con variante de 4 factores si hay preferment.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`t_harina_c`	No	Temperatura de la harina en °C. Si no se indica, se asume igual a la temperatura ambiente.
`t_ambiente_c`	Yes	Temperatura ambiente de la cocina en °C.
`ddt_objetivo_c`	No	Temperatura final deseada de la masa en °C. Típico: 23-25°C para masa madre, 26-28°C para levadura comercial. Por defecto 24°C.
`t_preferment_c`	No	Temperatura del preferment (poolish, levain, biga) si la receta lo usa. Activa la fórmula de 4 factores.
`tipo_amasadora`	No	Tipo de amasado (cada uno genera distinta fricción). Por defecto manual.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's role is supplementary. It adds the formula and mentions a 4-factor variant, but doesn't detail friction calculation based on mixer type or default behaviors beyond what's in the schema.

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, front-loading the core purpose and formula. Every sentence adds value with no fluff. It is highly concise and structured effectively.

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 5 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the formula and variant conditions. It covers the essential behavioral context. However, it could mention the return value format (likely the water temperature in °C) for completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters with meaning. The description repeats the formula context but does not add new semantics beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: calculating exact water temperature to achieve desired dough temperature, using a specific formula. It distinguishes itself from sibling calculators like 'calcular_hidratacion_pan' by focusing on this specific variable.

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?

Usage is implied by the description: use when you need to compute water temperature for dough. However, no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives is provided. Sibling tools may cover similar baking calculations, but no comparison is made.

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?