Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-nec2-antenna

mcp-nec2-antenna

by RFingAdam
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

nec2_simulate

Simulate an antenna using NEC2 to compute impedance and radiation pattern across a specified frequency sweep.

Instructions

Run NEC2 simulation on an antenna to get impedance and radiation pattern.

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": {
      "antenna_id": "<antenna_id>"
    },
    "name": "nec2_simulate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
antenna_idYesAntenna ID from create_* tools
frequency_start_mhzNoStart frequency for sweep (default: design freq * 0.9)
frequency_end_mhzNoEnd frequency for sweep (default: design freq * 1.1)
frequency_stepsNoNumber of frequency points (default: 21)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided; the description only mentions the output (impedance and radiation pattern) without disclosing side effects, performance implications, or whether the simulation modifies the antenna state.

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?

Single sentence, no wasted words, directly conveys the tool's action and output.

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

Completeness3/5

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

No output schema; description vaguely mentions impedance and radiation pattern without specifying format or units. The sweep parameters are described in schema but not summarized in the description.

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 has 100% coverage with adequate descriptions for each parameter. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but expectations for default behavior (e.g., frequency sweep defaults) are not clarified.

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 runs an NEC2 simulation on an antenna to obtain impedance and radiation pattern, distinguishing it from creation and listing sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied after antenna creation, but alternatives or prerequisites are not mentioned.

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