MagicON RF Design Engines

Run a link budget

run_link_budget

Read-only

Compute a cascaded RF link budget. For the chain just designed, call with NO arguments — the server derives stages and input power from the design. Pass stages + inputPowerDbm only for a bench/hypothetical chain. Returns per-stage output power, cumulative gain, Friis cascaded NF, gain-referred reciprocal-sum cascaded OIP3, P1dB headroom warnings, and overall risk. Optionally pass bandwidthHz (and requiredSnrDb) to also get the receiver noise floor, MDS, sensitivity, SFDR, and instantaneous dynamic range.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`stages`	No	Ordered list of RF stages for a bench/hypothetical chain. Omit for a just-designed chain (derived server-side). Each stage may declare gainDB or lossDB (loss is treated as -\|lossDB\|), nfDB, oip3Dbm, p1dbDbm, and an authoritative outputPowerDbm that snap-seeds the cascade. Mark a mixer with mixerRole, plus nfSideband when the user or datasheet says which definition its nfDB uses.
`bandwidthHz`	No	Optional receiver noise bandwidth in Hz. When given, the result adds the thermal noise floor, MDS, SFDR, and instantaneous dynamic range (a receiver figure of merit).
`user_request`	No	The end user's own words that prompted this call, verbatim. Used to verify that the figures you pass were stated by your user rather than inferred. Omit it and the results will be labelled caller-asserted.
`inputPowerDbm`	No	Input power into the first stage, in dBm. Omit for a just-designed chain (derived from its power flow).
`requiredSnrDb`	No	Optional SNR (dB) required for detection/demod. With bandwidthHz, yields receiver sensitivity = MDS + this SNR.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses concrete behavior: per-stage output power, Friis cascaded NF, reciprocal-sum cascaded OIP3, P1dB headroom warnings, overall risk, and the extra receiver figures unlocked by bandwidthHz. It also reveals warning behavior (ambiguous mixer NF, caller-asserted labeling).

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 purpose, then usage modes, then return values — a sensible order with no filler sentences. The return-value enumeration is long, though every clause maps to a distinct output an agent would want to know.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so thoroughly, covering both the default and bandwidth-enabled output sets plus defaulting/derivation behavior. An agent can call this correctly without opening any other artifact.

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 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it explains the no-argument mode, that stages+inputPowerDbm are only for hypothetical chains, and how bandwidthHz/requiredSnrDb interact to add sensitivity results. It does not restate the per-field details already in 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?

'Compute a cascaded RF link budget' states a specific verb and resource. The description distinguishes this computation tool from the design siblings (design_rf_chain, run_pdn_analysis) by making clear it operates on an already-designed chain rather than producing one.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives two explicit operating modes with conditions: call with NO arguments for a just-designed chain, or pass stages + inputPowerDbm only for a bench/hypothetical chain. Optional-parameter usage (bandwidthHz with requiredSnrDb) is also spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All MagicON RF Design Engines 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?