EngineerCore — Mechanical Engineering Calculator

Tune PID

tune_pid

Read-onlyIdempotent

Generate PID tuning parameters using Ziegler-Nichols and Cohen-Coon methods from a FOPDT process model. Returns Kp, Ki, Kd for the selected controller type and method, with reliability flags and method comparison. All inputs must be in strict SI units.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`method`	No	Tuning method to apply	both
`dead_time`	Yes	Process dead time theta in seconds
`process_gain`	Yes	Static process gain K from step test
`time_constant`	Yes	First-order time constant tau in seconds
`controller_type`	No	Type of controller to tune	PID

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`warnings`	Yes	Reliability advisory messages for the computed parameters
`cohen_coon`	Yes	Tuning parameters computed via the Cohen-Coon method
`ziegler_nichols`	Yes	Tuning parameters computed via the Ziegler-Nichols open-loop method
`recommended_method`	Yes	Which tuning method is preferred for this process model
`controllability_class`	Yes	Textual controllability assessment based on the dead-time ratio
`controllability_ratio`	Yes	Dead-time ratio r = θ/τ; values above 1.0 indicate a difficult process
`method_agreement_ratio`	Yes	Cohen-Coon / Ziegler-Nichols Kp ratio; values between 0.8–1.2 indicate good agreement

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral detail about return values (Kp, Ki, Kd, reliability flags, method comparison) and SI unit requirement, exceeding what annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences: first clearly states purpose, second adds constraints. No redundant words, efficient and front-loaded.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Explains return values and constraints (SI units). Given complexity of 5 parameters and available output schema, description is sufficiently complete for an AI agent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds extra meaning: all inputs must be in strict SI units, and mentions controller type and method options beyond schema 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?

Description states specific verb 'Generate' and resource 'PID tuning parameters' with clear distinction from sibling tools like analyze_state_space and analyze_vibration. It defines the methods (Ziegler-Nichols, Cohen-Coon) and output (Kp, Ki, Kd, reliability flags).

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?

Implies usage for FOPDT process model tuning and strict SI units, but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with alternatives. No exclusion criteria provided.

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

All EngineerCore — Mechanical Engineering Calculator 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

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool addresses a distinct area: state-space analysis, vibration analysis, and PID tuning. No overlap in functionality, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case: analyze_state_space, analyze_vibration, tune_pid. The prefix 'analyze' for two tools and 'tune' for the third is appropriate for their actions.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is appropriate for a focused mechanical engineering calculator covering control and vibration analysis. Each tool provides significant functionality, and the count is neither too sparse nor overly heavy.

Completeness4/5

For the domain of dynamics and control, the tools cover state-space analysis, vibration analysis, and PID tuning, which are core topics. Minor gaps exist, such as frequency response analysis, but the set is largely complete for basic control system design and vibration assessment.

Resources

Need Help?