MaCalculatriceEnLigne

calculate_ideal_weight

Estimate ideal body weight using Lorentz and Devine formulas. Returns: {lorentz_kg, devine_kg, average_kg}. See list_bundles for related 'sante' calculators.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sex`	Yes	Biological sex
`height_cm`	Yes	Height in centimeters

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`result`	No	Computed result. Object whose fields depend on the tool (e.g. {tax, marginal_rate, brackets} for tax tools, {volume_l, gallons} for volume tools).
`source`	No	Authoritative source for the rule or formula (e.g. "Article 197 CGI", "NF DTU 21").
`formula`	No	Human-readable formula or method used (e.g. "I=P·r·t", "Magnus formula").
`reference_url`	No	Link to a calcul2 page documenting the calculation in detail.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided. The description discloses the output format and formulas used, which is adequate for a calculator, but lacks any behavioral traits like limitations or prerequisites.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the main function and output. Every word serves a purpose.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (calculator with two params), 100% schema coverage, and the existence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the formulas and output structure.

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 coverage is 100%, both parameters are described in the schema. The description restates the need for height_cm and sex but adds no additional meaning 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 estimates ideal body weight using Lorentz and Devine formulas. It specifies the output structure and distinguishes itself from sibling calculators by naming the formulas and mentioning related 'sante' calculators.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'see list_bundles for related calculators' provides minimal context but does not define selection criteria or exclusions.

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

All MaCalculatriceEnLigne 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.