Academic Writer MCP

Convertir une grandeur

convert_units

Read-onlyIdempotent

Converts a measured value to a specified target unit for academic and technical writing, such as rpm to rad/s, MPa to N/mm², or kWh to MJ.

Instructions

Convertit une grandeur : « 1450 об/мин » en « рад/с », « 200 МПа » en « Н/мм2 », « 2,5 кВт·ч » en « МДж ».

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": {
      "value": "<value>",
      "target_unit": "<target_unit>"
    },
    "name": "convert_units"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes
`target_unit`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`value`	Yes
`unit_si`	Yes
`si_value`	Yes
`converted`	Yes
`target_unit`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true and openWorld=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the dimensional scope implied by the examples (rotational speed, stress, energy) but says nothing about precision/rounding, handling of incompatible dimensions, or failure behavior — meaningful gaps for a computation tool that returns a derived value.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence plus three examples — no padding, and the purpose is stated before the illustrations. The examples are somewhat redundant in structure (three of the same shape) and mix French prose with Cyrillic unit tokens, which could momentarily confuse a parser.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, and the operation is simple with only two parameters. Still, for a 0%-coverage schema the definition leaves the accepted input grammar and supported unit families underspecified, which is the main risk in calling it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0% — 'value' and 'target_unit' are bare strings. The examples do implicitly reveal the expected format (value carries the number plus source unit, e.g. '1450 об/мин', while target_unit is a bare unit, e.g. 'рад/с'), which is genuinely useful. However, it never states this convention explicitly nor whether a plain number or separator variants (comma vs. dot) are accepted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Convertit une grandeur') and immediately grounds it with three concrete conversion examples, so the agent knows this is a unit-conversion tool. It is clearly distinct from the document/academic siblings, though it does not explicitly say so.

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?

There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The examples loosely imply the tool handles physical quantities with unit strings, but nothing states boundaries such as supported unit families or what to do outside them.

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

Deploy Server