Skip to main content
Glama
IBM

Physics MCP Server

by IBM

calculate_terminal_velocity

Calculate terminal velocity by balancing drag and weight forces for objects falling through fluids. Input mass, area, fluid density, and drag coefficient to determine maximum falling speed.

Instructions

Calculate terminal velocity when drag equals weight.

At terminal velocity, forces balance:
    F_drag = F_weight
    v_terminal = √(2mg / ρC_dA)

Args:
    mass: Object mass in kg
    cross_sectional_area: Area perpendicular to fall direction in m²
    fluid_density: Fluid density in kg/m³ (air=1.225, water=1000)
    drag_coefficient: Drag coefficient (sphere=0.47, skydiver=1.0)
    gravity: Gravitational acceleration in m/s² (default 9.81)

Returns:
    Terminal velocity, time to 95%, and drag force at terminal

Example - Skydiver terminal velocity:
    result = await calculate_terminal_velocity(
        mass=70,  # kg
        cross_sectional_area=0.7,  # m² (belly-down position)
        fluid_density=1.225,  # air
        drag_coefficient=1.0,  # human
    )
    # v_terminal ≈ 54 m/s (120 mph)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
massYes
cross_sectional_areaYes
fluid_densityYes
drag_coefficientNo
gravityNo
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully explains what the tool calculates (terminal velocity, time to 95%, and drag force), provides the underlying physics formula, and includes a detailed example with realistic values. The description doesn't mention computational limitations or error handling, but provides substantial behavioral context.

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?

The description is well-structured and efficiently organized: purpose statement, physics formula, parameter documentation, return values, and a practical example. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information. The formatting with clear sections enhances readability.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a physics calculation tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides excellent coverage of inputs, formula, and example usage. The main gap is the lack of explicit documentation about the return format structure (though values are listed), but overall it's highly complete given the context.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed parameter documentation. Each parameter gets clear units (kg, m², kg/m³), typical values (air=1.225, sphere=0.47), and physical meaning. The description adds significant value beyond what the bare 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Calculate terminal velocity when drag equals weight.' It provides the specific physics formula and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like 'calculate_drag_force' or 'calculate_projectile_with_drag' by focusing on the equilibrium condition where forces balance.

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 description provides clear context about when to use this tool (calculating terminal velocity in fluid dynamics scenarios) and includes an example with realistic parameter values for a skydiver. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention specific alternatives among the many sibling physics calculation tools.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/IBM/chuk-mcp-physics'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server