Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
EMC Regulations MCP Server

EMC Regulations MCP Server

by RFingAdam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

automotive_immunity_method

Retrieve ISO 11452 automotive immunity test method specifications for EMC compliance. Methods include ALSE, TEM, BCI, stripline, direct injection, magnetic, portable TX, reverberation.

Instructions

Get details on an ISO 11452 immunity test method. Methods: ALSE (Part 2), TEM cell (Part 3), BCI (Part 4), stripline (Part 5), direct injection (Part 7), magnetic (Part 8), portable TX (Part 9), reverberation (Part 11).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
methodYesTest method or ISO 11452 part number

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv0.2.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says 'Get details' without explaining what details are returned, whether it is read-only, or any constraints.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description fails to specify what 'details' includes (e.g., frequency range, test setup). This leaves the agent uncertain about the return value.

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% with a clear enum and description for the 'method' parameter. The description repeats the enum values and adds mapping to part numbers, but adds little beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states 'Get details on an ISO 11452 immunity test method' and lists the methods, making the purpose evident. However, 'details' is vague, and it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'iso11452_levels', which likely returns test levels.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'iso11452_levels' or 'immunity_test_plan'. The description assumes the agent knows the context.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools