Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

The Cable Code

by io.github.exquad
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

IEC 60287 current rating of one single-core MV or HV circuit at your site

iec60287_rating
Read-onlyIdempotent

The Enterprise IEC 60287 calculation: the continuous current rating of one circuit of three single cores of a medium or high voltage design, in trefoil or flat, buried direct, in buried ducts (one cable in each) or in free air, bonded at both ends, single-point or cross-bonded, at the site conditions sent (IEC 60287-1-1:2006+A1:2014 and IEC 60287-2-1:2015, read at standard level page by page): every step (the a.c. resistance with ys and yp, the dielectric loss, the screen loss factors, T1, T3, T4, the losses) with its value, unit, clause and page, the notes on what was taken and, where no rating is given, the reasons. Where the site is unknown, the values of IEC 60287-3-1:2017, 4.2, Tables 1 and 2, p. 7 stand (1 m, ground 20 °C, air 25 °C, soil 1.0 K·m/W). Not covered: armour, corrugated sheaths, three-core cables, drying out of the soil, cyclic loads, duct banks, crossings. Always paid, at its own Enterprise-grade price: on the site an Enterprise member's calculation. input: {laying: buried | duct | air, formation: trefoil | flat, bonding: both | single | cross, freq?: 50 | 60, spacingMm? (axis to axis; absent: touching), depthM? (default 1), soil? (K·m/W, default 1), groundC? (default 20), airC? (default 25), duct?: {material: pe | pvc | earthenware, innerMm, outerMm} (laying duct), solar? (W/m², laying air; absent: shaded), spacing25?: true (bonding both, the spacing along the route not known: the screen loss raised by 25 %, IEC 60287-1-1 2.3.4 b))}. $5.00 per calculation in USDC with x402; no free allowance; a list of up to 50 items at $5.00 per item, one payment.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoAny of the site's 15 languages; default en.
specNoInstead of a sentence: a spec as design_cable takes it.
inputNoinput: {laying: buried | duct | air, formation: trefoil | flat, bonding: both | single | cross, freq?: 50 | 60, spacingMm? (axis to axis; absent: touching), depthM? (default 1), soil? (K·m/W, default 1), groundC? (default 20), airC? (default 25), duct?: {material: pe | pvc | earthenware, innerMm, outerMm} (laying duct), solar? (W/m², laying air; absent: shaded), spacing25?: true (bonding both, the spacing along the route not known: the screen loss raised by 25 %, IEC 60287-1-1 2.3.4 b))}
itemsNoInstead of one: a project's list, 1 to 50 items, each {sentence | spec | design, input}; always in full, paid per item.
designNoInstead of a sentence: the design field of a design_cable answer.
sentenceNoThe cable in words or its designation, as design_cable takes it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / input / description
      Previous value: -"input: {laying: buried | duct | air, formation: trefoil | flat, bonding: both | single | cross, freq?: 50 | 60, spacingMm? (axis to axis; absent: touching), depthM? (default 1), soil? (K·m/W, default 1), groundC? (default 20), airC? (default 25), duct?: {material: pe | pvc | earthenware, innerMm, outerMm} (laying duct), solar? (W/m², laying air; absent: shaded)}"New value: +"input: {laying: buried | duct | air, formation: trefoil | flat, bonding: both | single | cross, freq?: 50 | 60, spacingMm? (axis to axis; absent: touching), depthM? (default 1), soil? (K·m/W, default 1), groundC? (default 20), airC? (default 25), duct?: {material: pe | pvc | earthenware, innerMm, outerMm} (laying duct), solar? (W/m², laying air; absent: shaded), spacing25?: true (bonding both, the spacing along the route not known: the screen loss raised by 25 %, IEC 60287-1-1 2.3.4 b))}"
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses that the tool is always paid at $5 per calculation (also per item for lists up to 50, one payment), what happens when site data is unknown (IEC default values), and exactly what the response contains: every step with value, unit, clause, page, notes, and reasons when no rating is given.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single dense paragraph that repeats the entire input schema verbatim and states the pricing model multiple times ('Always paid', '$5.00 per calculation', 'no free allowance', 'list of up to 50 items at $5.00 per item, one payment'). These redundancies make it bloated and poorly 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?

For a complex calculation tool with six parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers standards references, input defaults, output detail, scope exclusions, and payment behavior. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 every parameter and the nested input object in detail. The description largely repeats that same input block verbatim, adding little new syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a precise verb and resource: the continuous current rating of one circuit of three single cores, with explicit laying, formation, and bonding options. It distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing design_cable for the spec/design input and by listing exclusions such as armour, three-core cables, and duct banks.

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 'Not covered' list and the note about default site conditions give clear scope boundaries. However, it never explicitly states when to choose this tool over design_cable or other siblings; the guidance is implied by the described applicability rather than phrased as a routing rule.

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

All The Cable Code toolsInspect
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