Skip to main content
Glama
LGDiMaggio

Predictive Maintenance MCP Server

by LGDiMaggio

generate_iso_report

Create ISO 20816-3 evaluation reports as HTML files from vibration signal data to assess machinery condition according to ISO standards.

Instructions

    Generate professional ISO 20816-3 evaluation report as HTML file.

    **NEW PREFERRED METHOD**: Generates a professional HTML report file
    instead of inline content. Saves to reports/ directory.

    Args:
        signal_file: Signal filename in data/signals/
        sampling_rate: Sampling rate in Hz (auto-detect if None)
        machine_group: ISO machine group (1=large >300kW, 2=medium 15-300kW)
        support_type: 'rigid' or 'flexible'
        operating_speed_rpm: Operating speed in RPM (optional)
        ctx: MCP context

    Returns:
        Dictionary with file path, metadata, and summary (NO HTML content)

    Example:
        >>> result = generate_iso_report(
        ...     "real_train/baseline_1.csv",
        ...     machine_group=2,
        ...     support_type="rigid"
        ... )
    

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
signal_fileYes
sampling_rateNo
machine_groupNo
support_typeNorigid
operating_speed_rpmNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool generates an HTML file saved to `reports/` directory and returns a dictionary (no HTML content). It does not mention destructive behavior, but for a report generation tool that is acceptable. It could note potential side effects (e.g., overwriting files) but is mostly transparent.

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?

The description is well-structured with sections for purpose, parameters, returns, and example. It is slightly long but each part earns its place. Minor tightening could reduce redundancy (e.g., 'professional' appears twice), but overall it is effective and easy to parse.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema provided by context), the description covers purpose, parameters, return format, and example usage. It integrates well with sibling tools by being specific about its ISO 20816-3 focus. It could mention related tools for cross-referencing, but is largely complete.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema: it explains each parameter's purpose (e.g., 'Signal filename in data/signals/', 'auto-detect if None' for sampling_rate, ISO machine group definitions). With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates and provides clear, actionable parameter details.

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 generates a professional ISO 20816-3 evaluation report as an HTML file. It specifies the verb 'generate' and the resource 'ISO 20816-3 evaluation report', distinguishing it from sibling report-generation tools like `generate_fft_report` and `generate_envelope_report`.

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: it is the 'NEW PREFERRED METHOD' compared to inline content generation, and includes a usage example. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like `assess_vibration_severity` or `evaluate_iso_20816`, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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/LGDiMaggio/predictive-maintenance-mcp'

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