Skip to main content
Glama
tudadada

subsea-flow-calculator

by tudadada
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

calculate_pipe_collapse

Calculates subsea pipeline collapse pressure, plastic yield, elastic buckling, allowable external pressure, and maximum operating water depth per API RP 1111.

Instructions

Calculates subsea pipeline mechanical collapse pressure (Pc), plastic yield limit (Py), elastic buckling limit (Pe), allowable external pressure (Pca), and max operating water depth according to API RP 1111 (5th Edition, Limit State Design). Optionally evaluates site-specific water depth compliance and buckle arrestor requirements.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
steel_gradeNoAPI 5L steel grade ('X52', 'X60', 'X65', 'X70', 'X80') or custom yield strength in psi. Default: 'X65'.X65
design_factorNoAPI RP 1111 collapse design factor fc. Default: 0.70.
water_depth_metersNoOptional site-specific seabed water depth in meters to evaluate API 1111 compliance margin.
outer_diameter_inchYesNominal outside diameter (OD) of the steel pipe in inches (e.g. 10.75, 12.75, 16.0).
wall_thickness_inchYesNominal wall thickness (WT) of the steel pipe in inches (e.g. 0.750, 0.812, 1.000).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the tool computes five distinct limit-state quantities and optionally performs a compliance/buckle-arrestor check, but it says nothing about output units, result structure, valid input ranges, or failure behavior for non-compliant designs.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary computation and its governing standard, then the optional capability. Dense but every clause carries information; only minor tightening would be possible.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates reasonably by enumerating the computed outputs (Pc, Py, Pe, Pca, max depth) and naming the design code and edition. It stops short of specifying output units or return format, which leaves a modest gap for a numerically precise engineering calculation.

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 100%, so all five parameters already carry units, defaults, and examples in the schema. The description only restates the optional water-depth evaluation, adding no semantics beyond the structured fields; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Calculates) and precise resource (subsea pipeline mechanical collapse pressure), and enumerates the exact quantities returned (Pc, Py, Pe, Pca, max operating water depth) under a named standard. Siblings (meg_inhibitor_dosage, hydrostatic_pressure, hydrate_equilibrium_approx) occupy different problem domains, so no disambiguation is needed.

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?

Usage context is implied: it is a design-check calculator per API RP 1111 and the optional water-depth path is flagged as site-specific compliance evaluation. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of how it relates to the sibling hydrostatic_pressure or hydrate tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools