Arc Flash Platform — Estudos Elétricos

Dimensionamento de cabo BT (NBR 5410)

dimensionar_cabo

Read-only

Dimensiona a seção de um cabo BT pela ABNT NBR 5410: ampacidade (Tab. 36-39 + fatores), queda de tensão, coordenação de sobrecarga (§5.3.4.1), neutro e PE. sistema ∈ {1FN,2F,3F,3FN}; metodo = método de instalação (A1,A2,B1,B2,C,D,E,F,G); material ∈ {Cu,Al}; isolacao ∈ {PVC,EPR}. icc_quadro_kA = Icc presumida no quadro de origem. n_circuitos_agrupados = nº de circuitos no mesmo eletroduto/leito (aplica o fator de agrupamento da Tab. 42 — reduz a ampacidade); arranjo ∈ {feixe,camada}. disjuntor_In_A/curva_disjuntor (B,C,D) = o dispositivo REAL instalado (sem eles, assume o menor MCB ≥ Ib, curva C). Gratuito.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`fp`	No
`metodo`	No	B1
`api_key`	No
`arranjo`	No	feixe
`sistema`	No	3FN
`isolacao`	No	PVC
`material`	No	Cu
`tensao_V`	Yes
`potencia_W`	Yes
`comprimento_m`	Yes
`icc_quadro_kA`	No
`queda_max_pct`	No
`disjuntor_In_A`	No
`curva_disjuntor`	No	C
`temp_ambiente_C`	No
`n_circuitos_agrupados`	No

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint: true, indicating no destructive side effects. The description adds context about defaults, the standard applied, and parameter meanings. It does not mention output format or error handling, but the behavioral safety is well covered.

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?

The description is a dense paragraph that efficiently conveys the purpose and parameters. While front-loaded, it could benefit from more structured formatting (e.g., list of parameters) to improve readability, but it is still concise for the complexity.

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?

The description covers the calculation basis thoroughly but omits the output format (e.g., what the tool returns). Given no output schema, this is a notable gap. Additionally, it doesn't mention error conditions or prerequisites, which would enhance completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the meaning, allowed values, and defaults for key parameters like sistema, metodo, material, isolacao, disjuntor_In_A, etc., adding significant value 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 the tool's purpose: dimension a low voltage cable according to ABNT NBR 5410, listing the specific aspects (ampacity, voltage drop, etc.). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools which are other electrical calculations.

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 tool is implicitly for cable sizing, and sibling tools cover different calculations, so there is no confusion. However, no explicit 'when to use' or exclusion criteria are given.

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

All Arc Flash Platform — Estudos Elétricos 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

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct electrical calculation or administrative task. Overlapping concepts like 'calcular_curto_circuito' and 'partida_motor' have clearly different purposes (short-circuit vs. voltage dip). No two tools appear to do the same thing.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in Portuguese, using snake_case. Examples include 'calcular_curto_circuito', 'dimensionar_cabo', and 'verificar_seccionamento'. There are no deviations or mixed conventions.

Tool Count5/5

20 tools is well-scoped for a specialized electrical engineering calculations server. Each tool addresses a specific need without redundancy or excessive breadth. The count feels appropriate for the domain.

Completeness5/5

The tool set covers a comprehensive lifecycle: calculation (short-circuit, arc flash, motor starting), design (cable sizing, CT sizing, capacitor banks), coordination (protection time curves), verification (shock protection), and workflow (report generation, quote request). No obvious gaps for the intended purpose.

Resources

Need Help?