profili-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Search Airfoils

search_airfoils

Search a 2200+ airfoil library by name substring or thickness and camber bounds to find matching profiles for design, analysis, or editing.

Instructions

Search the 2200+ airfoil library. name is a SQL LIKE substring (e.g. 'NACA 24' or 'AG '). Thickness/camber bounds use the database's own units for MaxWidthSuCorda / MaxCamberSuCorda (see docs/SCHEMA.md).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_airfoils"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	No
`limit`	No
`library`	No
`camber_max`	No
`camber_min`	No
`install_dir`	No
`thickness_max`	No
`thickness_min`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden; it does convey the library size (2200+), which helps the agent reason about result volume, and it points to docs/SCHEMA.md for unit conventions. It says nothing about the default/cap on `limit`, ordering, or whether results are truncated, which matters for a search tool with a limit parameter.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, with no filler. The only weakness is that the unit question is deferred to an external document rather than answered inline.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 8 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description leaves too much unstated: the meaning of `library` and `install_dir`, the units and direction of the min/max bounds (the note names MaxWidthSuCorda/MaxCamberSuCorda without translating them), and the limit behavior. The existence of an output schema excuses it from explaining return values, but not from these gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0% across 8 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It usefully documents `name` as a SQL LIKE substring with examples, and gestures at units for the thickness/camber bounds, but `limit`, `library`, and `install_dir` are never mentioned and the min/max semantics are left implicit.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Search the 2200+ airfoil library") and adds a concrete scale signal that tells an agent this is a bulk-discovery tool. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like find_airfoils_by_polar or list_libraries, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-naming guidance. The agent must infer that this is for browsing/querying the library rather than for polar lookups or geometry retrieval, and nothing tells it how this differs from list_libraries.

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

Deploy Server