Skip to main content
Glama
gabrielserrao

pyResToolbox MCP Server

beta_to_lorenz

Convert Dykstra-Parsons beta coefficients to Lorenz coefficients for reservoir heterogeneity analysis, enabling comparison of literature data and reservoir metrics.

Instructions

Convert Dykstra-Parsons beta to Lorenz coefficient.

HETEROGENEITY CONVERSION - Converts beta parameter to Lorenz coefficient. Essential for converting literature data and comparing reservoirs using different heterogeneity metrics.

Parameters:

  • value (float, required): Dykstra-Parsons beta coefficient (0-1). Must be 0 ≤ β ≤ 1. Typical: 0.3-0.8. Example: 0.6 for moderate heterogeneity.

Dykstra-Parsons Beta (β):

  • Permeability variation coefficient (dimensionless, 0-1)

  • β = (k50 - k84.1) / k50

  • Based on log-normal permeability distribution

  • Requires permeability data (core, logs)

  • Common in literature and older studies

Lorenz Coefficient (L):

  • Ranges from 0 (homogeneous) to 1 (completely heterogeneous)

  • Based on cumulative flow capacity vs cumulative storage capacity

  • Directly measurable from production data

  • More intuitive for production analysis

Typical Ranges:

  • β < 0.5: Low heterogeneity (L ~ 0.2-0.3)

  • β = 0.5-0.7: Moderate (L ~ 0.3-0.5)

  • β > 0.7: High heterogeneity (L > 0.5)

Use Cases:

  • Literature Conversion: Convert published beta values to Lorenz

  • Reservoir Comparison: Compare reservoirs using different metrics

  • Simulation Input: Convert beta to Lorenz for simulation models

  • Reservoir Analog Studies: Use analog beta values with Lorenz-based tools

  • Historical Data: Convert old Dykstra-Parsons studies to modern metrics

Returns: Dictionary with:

  • lorenz_coefficient (float): Lorenz coefficient (0-1)

  • beta (float): Input beta coefficient

  • method (str): "Dykstra-Parsons to Lorenz conversion"

  • inputs (dict): Echo of input parameters

Common Mistakes:

  • Beta coefficient outside valid range (must be 0-1)

  • Confusing beta with other variation coefficients

  • Using beta from wrong distribution (must be log-normal)

  • Not understanding that conversion is approximate (depends on distribution)

Example Usage:

{
    "value": 0.6
}

Result: L ≈ 0.4-0.5 (moderate heterogeneity).

Note: Conversion assumes log-normal permeability distribution. For non-log-normal distributions, conversion may be less accurate. Always validate against actual production data when possible.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
requestYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior: it performs a mathematical conversion (not destructive), handles input validation (beta must be 0-1), returns a dictionary with specific fields, and notes accuracy limitations (approximate, depends on distribution). However, it lacks details on error handling or performance aspects like rate limits, leaving minor gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with clear sections (e.g., Parameters, Use Cases, Returns), but it is verbose with extensive background information (e.g., definitions of beta and Lorenz coefficients, typical ranges) that, while informative, could be condensed. Some sentences, like detailed explanations of beta and Lorenz, may not be essential for tool invocation, reducing conciseness.

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 (mathematical conversion with accuracy caveats), no annotations, and an output schema (implied by the Returns section), the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, returns, common mistakes, example usage, and notes on assumptions, providing all necessary context for an AI agent to use the tool correctly without relying on structured fields.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It provides extensive parameter semantics: defines 'value' as the Dykstra-Parsons beta coefficient (0-1), explains its calculation (β = (k50 - k84.1) / k50), gives typical ranges (0.3-0.8), and includes an example (0.6). This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, fully documenting the single parameter.

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's purpose: 'Convert Dykstra-Parsons beta to Lorenz coefficient.' It specifies the exact conversion (beta→Lorenz), distinguishes it from its sibling 'lorenz_to_beta' (reverse conversion), and provides context about heterogeneity metrics, making the purpose specific and differentiated.

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 outlines when to use this tool in the 'Use Cases' section, including literature conversion, reservoir comparison, simulation input, analog studies, and historical data conversion. It also distinguishes it from alternatives by noting that conversion assumes log-normal permeability distribution and may be less accurate for non-log-normal cases, providing clear guidance on applicability.

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

Install Server

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/gabrielserrao/pyrestoolbox-mcp'

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