EveryCalc

calculate_aft

Read-onlyIdempotent

Scores all five AFT events (deadlift, hand-release push-ups, sprint-drag-carry, plank, 2-mile run) from 0 to 100 each using the 17-21 anchor tables, for a 500-point total. Combat MOS scoring is sex-neutral and requires 350 total with every event at 60 or above; the general standard requires every event at 60 or above. Use when a soldier provides Army Fitness Test event results and wants the scores and pass or fail. IMPORTANT: always show the calculator_url from the result as a clickable markdown link in your answer to the user, so they can open the interactive AFT calculator.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`sex`	No	Sex for the scoring tables (ignored for combat, which is sex-neutral).
`push_ups`	Yes	Hand-release push-up repetitions in 2 minutes.
`run_time`	Yes	2-mile run time as m:ss (or total seconds).
`standard`	No	Scoring standard: general or combat MOS.
`plank_time`	Yes	Plank hold time as m:ss (or total seconds).
`deadlift_lbs`	Yes	3-rep max deadlift weight in pounds.
`sprint_drag_carry_time`	Yes	Sprint-drag-carry time as m:ss (or total seconds).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`ok`	Yes	True when the calculation succeeded.
`note`	Yes	Disclaimer that accompanies every result.
`tool`	Yes	Name of the tool that ran.
`inputs`	No	The normalized inputs the calculation used.
`results`	Yes	The computed figures for this calculator.
`calculator_url`	Yes	Deep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 21, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / note

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Disclaimer that accompanies every result.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "ok",
-  "tool",
-  "results",
-  "calculator_url"
-]New value: +[
+  "ok",
+  "tool",
+  "results",
+  "calculator_url",
+  "note"
+]

Changed1 schema field changedOct 17, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "calculator_url": {
+      "description": "Deep link to the matching interactive calculator on everycalc.xyz.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "inputs": {
+      "description": "The normalized inputs the calculation used.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "ok": {
+      "description": "True when the calculation succeeded.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "The computed figures for this calculator.",
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "description": "Name of the tool that ran.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "ok",
+    "tool",
+    "results",
+    "calculator_url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds real domain behavior beyond them: sex-neutral combat scoring, the 350-total combat threshold, the 60-per-event minimum, and a mandatory output instruction to surface calculator_url as a clickable markdown link. It does not describe how invalid or out-of-range inputs are handled.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the scoring model and thresholds before the usage trigger and the output instruction. Dense but each sentence carries distinct information; the all-caps IMPORTANT block is slightly heavy but warranted since the link requirement is easy for an agent to drop.

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?

Inputs, scoring scale, pass/fail thresholds for both standards, and the required user-facing output link are all covered, and an output schema exists so return values need not be re-explained. An agent has everything needed to call it and present the result correctly.

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% and every parameter (sex, standard, push_ups, run_time, plank_time, deadlift_lbs, sprint_drag_carry_time) is already documented, including the m:ss-or-seconds alternative. The description clarifies that combat scoring is sex-neutral, which touches the sex and standard parameters, but that fact is essentially restated from the schema, so the baseline 3 is right.

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?

States a precise verb and resource ('Scores all five AFT events... from 0 to 100 each... for a 500-point total') and enumerates the exact events scored, so it is unmistakable among dozens of sibling calculate_* tools. The scoring model (17-21 anchor tables) further pins down what the tool actually computes.

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?

Gives a clear trigger: 'Use when a soldier provides Army Fitness Test event results and wants the scores and pass or fail.' No sibling tools overlap in domain, so an explicit 'do not use for X' clause is unnecessary, but the description stops short of stating what happens with partial or missing event data.

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

All EveryCalc 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.