immobilier

Check or size MEP systems (network flows, head losses, pump head, electrical panel, ducts)

cao_bim_mep

Read-only

Appelez quand vous devez verifier ou dimensionner un systeme MEP : connectivite et dimensionnement d'un reseau (action=reseau, defaut), debits cumules calcules d'un reseau hydraulique (action=debits, reseau + demandes), pertes de charge du chemin critique (action=pertes_reseau), hauteur manometrique d'une pompe (action=hmt, denivele_m), tableau electrique (action=tableau), chute de tension NF C 15-100 (action=chute_tension), disjoncteur (action=disjoncteur), gaine aeraulique (action=gaine) et friction constante (action=gaine_friction). Lecture seule, indicatif.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`c`	No	Pour action=pertes_reseau/hmt : coefficient Hazen-Williams (defaut 140)
`zeta`	No
`action`	No	reseau (defaut) \| debits \| pertes_reseau \| hmt \| tableau \| chute_tension \| disjoncteur \| gaine \| gaine_friction
`courbe`	No
`reseau`	No	Reseau MEP : {noeuds:{id:source\|appareil\|noeud}, liaisons:[{de, vers, diametre_mm, debit_l_min}]}
`circuit`	No	Pour action=chute_tension : {puissance_kw\|courant_a, section_mm2, longueur_m, usage}
`circuits`	No	Pour action=tableau : [{nom, puissance_kw, usage, tri, section_mm2, longueur_m}]
`demandes`	No	Pour action=debits/pertes_reseau/hmt : {noeud_appareil: debit_l_min}
`courant_a`	No
`debit_m3h`	No
`denivele_m`	No	Pour action=hmt : denivele geometrique (m)
`longueur_m`	No
`diametre_mm`	No
`rugosite_mm`	No
`perte_lin_pa_m`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 27, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / action / description

Previous value: -"reseau (defaut) | tableau | chute_tension | disjoncteur | gaine | gaine_friction"New value: +"reseau (defaut) | debits | pertes_reseau | hmt | tableau | chute_tension | disjoncteur | gaine | gaine_friction"

addedInput schema / properties / c

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour action=pertes_reseau/hmt : coefficient Hazen-Williams (defaut 140)",
+  "type": "number"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / demandes

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour action=debits/pertes_reseau/hmt : {noeud_appareil: debit_l_min}",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / denivele_m

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour action=hmt : denivele geometrique (m)",
+  "type": "number"
+}

Changed12 schema fields changedOct 25, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / action

Added value: +{
+  "description": "reseau (defaut) | tableau | chute_tension | disjoncteur | gaine | gaine_friction",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / circuit

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour action=chute_tension : {puissance_kw|courant_a, section_mm2, longueur_m, usage}",
+  "type": "object"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / circuits

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pour action=tableau : [{nom, puissance_kw, usage, tri, section_mm2, longueur_m}]",
+  "type": "array"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / courant_a
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / courbe
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / debit_m3h
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / diametre_mm
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / longueur_m
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / perte_lin_pa_m
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / rugosite_mm
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / zeta
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "number"
+}
```

changedInput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "reseau"
-]New value: +[]

AddedOct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description restates read-only but usefully adds 'indicatif', signaling results are approximate rather than authoritative. Beyond that it does not describe return format or per-action prerequisites. With the safety profile already handled by annotations, this is an adequate 3.

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?

Front-loaded with the 'when to call' condition and then a compact action-by-action enumeration. It is one dense sentence, so a bulleted structure would read better, but there is no wasted wording.

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 15-parameter sizing tool with no output schema, the description covers the action routing well but says nothing about what each action returns or how the results are shaped. Half the parameters remain undocumented in both schema and description, leaving clear gaps for an agent invoking complex modes.

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 coverage is only 47%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it maps each action to its relevant parameters (debits needs reseau + demandes; hmt needs denivele_m; chute_tension uses circuit; tableau uses circuits). That routing adds real meaning beyond the schema. It still leaves several parameters (zeta, courbe, rugosite_mm, perte_lin_pa_m) unexplained, so not a 5.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a clear verb+resource ('verifier ou dimensionner un systeme MEP') and then enumerates every action mode with its sub-resource (reseau, debits, pertes_reseau, hmt, tableau, chute_tension, disjoncteur, gaine, gaine_friction). This lets an agent determine capability without opening the schema. It does not, however, differentiate from overlapping siblings like cao_bim_mep_aeraulique or cao_bim_mep_dimensionnement, so it falls short of a 5.

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 opening 'Appelez quand vous devez verifier ou dimensionner...' gives a clear condition for use. It also flags that action=reseau is the default, which helps selection. No explicit when-not or alternative-tool routing is provided, so no 5.

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

All immobilier tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?