Skip to main content
Glama
SoapyRED

FreightUtils MCP Server

chargeable_weight_calculator

Read-onlyIdempotent

Calculate air freight chargeable weight by comparing actual gross weight with volumetric weight. Get the billable weight airlines use, with IATA or express divisors applied.

Instructions

Calculate air freight chargeable weight — the greater of actual gross weight and volumetric weight, which is what airlines bill. Volumetric weight (kg) = (L x W x H in cm) / divisor; the IATA-standard divisor is 6,000 (1 CBM = 166.67 kg), while express integrators (DHL, FedEx, UPS) typically use 5,000.

Behavior: deterministic; per-piece volumetric weight is rounded to 2 decimal places before totalling; basis reports which weight governs ("volumetric" = cargo is light for its size, "actual" = dense). Air mode only — sea W/M (1 CBM = 1,000 kg) is covered by consignment_calculator with mode=sea. Missing or non-positive inputs error with the failing parameter named. Rate-limited (anonymous use: 25 requests/day per IP): a 429 error body carries retry_after_seconds and a Retry-After header — back off and retry, or call get_subscribe_link for higher limits.

Returns: chargeable_weight_kg, basis, volumetric_weight_kg (total and per piece), gross_weight_kg, cbm, ratio, factor and pieces under result; normalized_input echoes the interpreted inputs and any defaults applied; plus confidence, _source and citation (the FreightUtils v1 response envelope).

Related: cbm_calculator (volume only), consignment_calculator (multi-line, all modes), uld_lookup (the equipment the freight flies in).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
factorNoVolumetric divisor in cm³/kg. Default: 6000 (IATA standard); express carriers typically 5000.
piecesNoNumber of identical pieces. Default: 1.
width_cmYesWidth of one piece in centimetres (> 0). Example: 80.
height_cmYesHeight of one piece in centimetres (> 0). Example: 100.
length_cmYesLength of one piece in centimetres (> 0). Example: 120.
gross_weight_kgYesActual gross weight of the WHOLE shipment (all pieces) in kilograms. Example: 500.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYes
resultYes
_sourceYes
citationYes
validityNo
warningsNo
confidenceYes
blocking_errorsNo
envelope_versionYes
normalized_inputNo
Install Server

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the operation as read-only and idempotent. The description adds important behavioral context beyond those: per-piece volumetric weight rounded to 2 decimals before totalling, basis reporting which weight governs, deterministic behavior, exact error behavior for missing/non-positive inputs, and rate-limit/retry handling via 429 responses. No contradiction with annotations.

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 long, but each section earns its place: main calculation, behavioral rules, error handling, response envelope, and related tools. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then organized topically, so an agent can quickly extract the essential directive.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity, the 6 parameters, output schema, and annotations, the description is complete: it covers scope, transformation logic, error conditions, rate limits, result envelope, and alternatives. It does not need to explain return values in detail because the output schema is present.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning: it explains the formula (L x W x H cm divided by divisor), the IATA vs. express-carrier divisor conventions, per-piece interpretation, and the distinction between volumetric and actual weight across pieces. This goes beyond the schema but does not need to fully repeat 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 opens with a specific verb-and-resource statement: 'Calculate air freight chargeable weight' and explains the core concept. It distinguishes the tool from explicit siblings (cbm_calculator, consignment_calculator, uld_lookup), so an agent can clearly tell what this tool is for.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when this tool applies: air mode only, and when it does not: sea W/M is covered by consignment_calculator with mode=sea. It also points to related alternatives and even behavior on rate limits with get_subscribe_link. Nothing is left ambiguous about choice of tool.

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

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/SoapyRED/freightutils-mcp'

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