Skip to main content
Glama
mdvaleed7

ETABS MCP Server

by mdvaleed7

etabs_set_is1893_seismic_params

Idempotent

Compute IS 1893 seismic scale factors for response spectrum analysis. Calculates scale factor from zone, importance, reduction, soil, damping, and returns results with clause references.

Instructions

Compute and report IS 1893:2016 seismic scale factors for RSA cases.

Calculates the scale factor SF = (Z/2) × (I/R) × (g/Sa_g_at_T1) for use in etabs_define_response_spectrum.

The full equivalent static base shear: VB = Ah × W where Ah = (Z/2) × (Sa/g) × (I/R)

For response spectrum analysis the ETABS scale factor applied to the spectrum function is typically: g × I / R (when the spectrum function is already in units of Sa/g, i.e. normalized). ETABS multiplies the function value by scale_factor to get spectral acceleration in length/time² units.

Args: load_case_x: Name of RSA case in X direction (e.g. "EQX"). load_case_y: Name of RSA case in Y direction (e.g. "EQY"). zone: IS 1893 seismic zone "II", "III", "IV", or "V". importance_factor: I — importance factor (1.0 ordinary, 1.2 important, 1.5 critical). IS 1893:2016 Table 8. response_reduction: R — response reduction factor. IS 1893:2016 Table 9. Typical: OMRF=3.0, SMRF=5.0. soil_type: Site type "I" (hard), "II" (medium), "III" (soft). IS 1893:2016 Table 1. damping_ratio: Critical damping ratio (default 0.05 = 5%). IS 1893:2016 Cl. 6.4.6. structure_type: "RC_frame", "Steel_frame", "Shear_wall", "Composite". Used for informational note only. modal_case: Name of the modal case. apply_scale_to_rsa: If True, returns ready-to-use ETABS scale factor (in m/s² for SI kN_m models). Set False for kip_ft models.

Returns: JSON with zone factor Z, Ah, scale factors, and IS 1893 clause references.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
load_case_xYes
load_case_yYes
zoneNoIII
importance_factorNo
response_reductionNo
soil_typeNoII
damping_ratioNo
structure_typeNoRC_frame
modal_caseNoMODAL
apply_scale_to_rsaNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, but the description does not clarify whether the tool modifies the model state or only computes values. The name suggests 'set', but the description says 'compute and report', creating ambiguity. The description adds formula context but lacks explicit behavior disclosure beyond annotations.

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?

The description is well-structured, starting with the main purpose and then providing detailed parameter information. It is slightly verbose due to formula repetitions, but each sentence adds necessary value for correct usage.

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 complexity of the tool (10 parameters, no schema descriptions, output schema exists), the description is comprehensive: it covers the calculation methodology, parameter meanings, defaults, and return format (JSON with specific fields). It also references related tools and code clauses, making it complete for an agent.

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 input schema has 0% schema description coverage, but the description provides detailed explanations for all 10 parameters, including defaults, accepted values, formulas, and references (e.g., IS 1893 tables). This fully compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 computes and reports IS 1893:2016 seismic scale factors for RSA cases. It specifies the verb (compute and report) and the resource (seismic scale factors), which sets it apart from sibling tools like etabs_check_is1893_drift or etabs_define_response_spectrum.

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?

The description implies this tool is used before defining a response spectrum with etabs_define_response_spectrum, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. The connection is only implicit.

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/mdvaleed7/ETABS-mcp'

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