D-Tools MCP Server

get_equipment_summary

Retrieve a grouped equipment summary for a D-Tools SI project, organizing quantities and costs by category or product ID.

Instructions

Return a grouped equipment summary for a D-Tools SI project, aggregating quantities and costs by category (falls back to product ID when no category is set).

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_equipment_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only describes aggregation behavior and fallback logic but omits read-only nature, authentication needs, or potential side effects.

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 that effectively communicates the core functionality without extraneous information.

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?

Adequately describes the return for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema. Could mention project existence assumption or empty data handling, but not required.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It implies 'id' is a project ID by mentioning 'D-Tools SI project', but doesn't explicitly state parameter meaning or provide format hints.

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?

Clearly states it returns a grouped equipment summary for a D-Tools SI project, aggregating quantities and costs by category with a fallback. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_project or list_projects.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. It simply describes the output without contextual usage advice.

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