Arc Flash Platform — Estudos Elétricos

Elevação de temperatura em painel (IEC 60890)

elevacao_temperatura_painel

Read-only

Elevação de temperatura do ar interno de um painel BT (IEC 60890) e verificação de aceitação (61439-1). perda_W = perdas dissipadas no invólucro; dimensões em metros. Exposição das faces (muda a área de resfriamento): face_topo ∈ {exposto,coberto}; face_traseira/face_laterais ∈ {exposta,coberta} (coberta = encostada na parede / em fila → aquece mais). tipo_instalacao 1–5 (Fig. 4); limite_equip_C = limite térmico do equipamento interno (2º veredito); regime ∈ {BT, MT (estimativa)}. Gratuito (uso limitado).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`regime`	No	BT
`api_key`	No
`perda_W`	Yes
`altura_m`	Yes
`face_topo`	No	exposto
`largura_m`	Yes
`ventilado`	No
`n_particoes`	No
`face_laterais`	No	exposta
`face_traseira`	No	exposta
`limite_equip_C`	No
`profundidade_m`	Yes
`temp_ambiente_C`	No
`tipo_instalacao`	No
`area_ventilacao_cm2`	No

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, indicating no side effects. The description adds context that covered faces increase heating and that the tool is free with limited use. It does not contradict annotations and transparently explains behavioral aspects beyond the structured field.

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 single paragraph that front-loads purpose and then lists parameter details. It is reasonably concise given the number of parameters, but could benefit from better structuring (e.g., bullet points) for easier scanning.

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?

Given 15 parameters, no output schema, and only readOnlyHint annotation, the description covers purpose and parameter meanings adequately. However, it lacks explanation of the return value (e.g., temperature rise, pass/fail) and how to interpret results, which is a notable gap.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description explains key parameters: perda_W, dimensions, face states, tipo_instalacao, limite_equip_C, and regime. It clarifies meanings and allowed values for face parameters. However, some parameters (ventilado, n_particoes, temp_ambiente_C, area_ventilacao_cm2, api_key) are not explained, leaving gaps.

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 calculates temperature rise of internal air in a LV panel per IEC 60890 and verifies acceptance per 61439-1. It specifies the resource (panel enclosure) and action (temperature rise calculation and verification). Among siblings, it is unique in addressing panel temperature, leaving no ambiguity.

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?

The description implies usage for thermal analysis of LV panels (with MV as estimation), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. No sibling comparison or when-not-to-use guidance is 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?