# Engineering Compliance Prover MCP for AI Agents AI Agent Connect

> Engineering Compliance Prover forces your AI to validate structural designs against strict US building codes like ASCE, ACI, and NEC. It stops the AI from giving vague industry standard answers and demands real capacity-demand ratios, traced load paths, specific material tolerances, and full FMEA analysis. Use it to ensure every design conclusion is backed by rigorous math rather than plausible-sounding guesses.

## Overview
- **Category:** productivity
- **Price:** Free
- **Endpoint:** https://edge.vinkius.com/vk_preview_WX6gmq5KCujIVI15RlJVQQniTOnVLSPvvQJbaqnN/ai-agent-connect
- **Tags:** engineering, structural, compliance, safety, fmea, structured-reasoning

## Description

Engineering is not an opinion. It is a matter of code compliance, failure analysis, and proven safety margins. When you use a standard AI for engineering tasks, it often falls into the trap of providing plausible designs that sound professional but lack the actual math required by law. It might tell you a structure is adequate based on industry standards without ever citing a specific normative code or calculating a capacity-demand ratio. This Connector changes the way your agent handles these tasks by forcing it to operate within the strict boundaries of US engineering practice. Instead of just proposing a design, your agent must now navigate five specific pivots. It has to validate the design against a specific code like ASCE 7-22, identify the controlling failure mode, calculate explicit safety factors, trace every load path, and specify exact material grades. It stops the AI from hand-waving and forces it to provide the math that lives and dies by. You get to move from looks sturdy to mathematically verified in every interaction. By connecting this through Vinkius, you ensure your agent never skips the rigorous steps that keep structures standing.

## Tools

### validate_engineering_compliance
Forces the AI to provide a full analysis including code citations, load paths, and safety factors. It ensures every design conclusion is backed by specific math rather than vague generalities.

## Prompt Examples

**Prompt:** 
```
Design a 10ft concrete retaining wall. Make it safe and follow the rules.
```

**Response:** 
```
Verdict: CODE_COMPLIANCE_BLIND. You cited 'industry standards' and claimed it will be 'very safe'. That is not an engineering specification. 

To proceed, please provide:
* **Specific Code:** (e.g., ACI 318)
* **Soil Loads:** Quantified values for the site
* **Concrete Grade:** Specific psi rating
* **Factor of Safety:** Target calculation for overturning.
```

**Prompt:** 
```
Design a W-shape steel beam spanning 20ft to support a 50 psf live load and 20 psf dead load. Validate the reasoning using the engineering compliance prover, citing AISC 360-16, checking lateral-torsional buckling, specifying ASTM A992 steel, and providing the max capacity ratio.
```

**Response:** 
```
Verdict: REASONING_PROVEN. 

**Design Summary:**
* **Member:** W-shape Steel Beam
* **Span:** 20ft
* **Code:** AISC 360-16
* **Material:** ASTM A992
* **Load Path:** Traced from 50 psf live / 20 psf dead loads to primary support.
* **Failure Mode:** Lateral-torsional buckling checked.
* **Capacity Ratio:** 0.82 (Passes $\phi R_n \ge R_u$).
```

**Prompt:** 
```
Specify a 10 AWG copper wire for a 30A circuit at 100ft. Validate the code compliance against NEC, but do not analyze voltage drop or thermal limits.
```

**Response:** 
```
Verdict: FAILURE_MODE_IGNORED. You validated against NEC, but intentionally ignored voltage drop and thermal runaway analysis. 

**Required Analysis:**
* **Voltage Drop:** Must calculate drop over 100ft to ensure it stays within 3% limit.
* **Thermal Limits:** Must confirm the wire won't exceed 60C or 75C depending on insulation.
* **Mitigation:** Please provide the calculated drop and thermal capacity to proceed.
```

## Capabilities

### Validate design against specific normative codes
Forces your AI to cite exact code sections like AISC 360-16 instead of vague best practices.

### Identify and analyze critical failure modes
Requires the agent to perform FMEA to identify which failure mode controls the design.

### Calculate explicit capacity-demand ratios
Demands actual numbers for safety factors rather than general claims of adequacy.

### Trace load paths through a structure
Ensures every load assumption has a traceable path from the source to the foundation.

### Specify exact material grades and tolerances
Forces the AI to provide specific grades like ASTM A992 instead of generic terms like steel.

## Use Cases

### Retaining Wall Safety Check
A user asks for a 10ft retaining wall. The agent rejects industry standards and demands ACI 318 specs and soil load quantification.

### Steel Beam Capacity Analysis
The agent calculates the capacity-demand ratio for a 20ft span under 50 psf live load using AISC 360-16.

### Electrical Circuit Validation
The agent flags a failure to analyze voltage drop and thermal runaway in a 30A circuit for a 100ft run.

### Seismic Load Path Tracing
The agent traces forces from the roof to the foundation, ensuring no hidden paths exist in the structural model.

## Benefits

- Stop Code Blindness by forcing your agent to cite specific sections like AISC 360-16 instead of vague industry standards.
- Get Proven Safety Factors by requiring the AI to show actual capacity-demand ratios and phi factors rather than just claiming a design is safe.
- Ensure Traceable Load Paths by forcing the agent to quantify every load assumption, from dead to seismic, and trace it to the foundation.
- Identify Critical Failure Modes by requiring a full FMEA analysis to find the controlling condition, such as lateral-torsional buckling.
- Specify Precise Material Grades by demanding exact specifications like ASTM A992 or 4000 psi f'c instead of generic terms like steel.

## How It Works

The bottom line is your AI stops guessing and starts providing code-compliant engineering calculations.

1. Provide the project scope and the specific US code you need to follow, such as ASCE 7-22.
2. Describe the load assumptions and the structural components for the AI to analyze.
3. Receive a rigorous compliance check that either approves the design with math or rejects it for structural deficiencies.

## Frequently Asked Questions

**Can the Engineering Compliance Prover check for US building codes?**
Yes, it validates designs against major US standards including ASCE, ACI, AISC, and NEC to ensure your projects meet legal safety requirements.

**How does this Connector help with structural safety?**
It forces your AI to perform rigorous failure mode analysis and calculate actual capacity-demand ratios rather than just guessing.

**Does this tool work for electrical engineering?**
Yes, it can check electrical designs against NEC codes, specifically looking for critical issues like voltage drop and thermal runaway.

**Will it help me get my designs approved by inspectors?**
It provides the exact code citations and mathematical proofs that building inspectors require to sign off on structural plans.

**Can I use this to check specific material grades?**
Yes, it demands precise material specifications like ASTM grades and concrete psi ratings, moving beyond vague descriptions like 'steel'.

**What happens if the AI gives a vague answer?**
The Connector will reject the answer and prompt the AI to provide the specific code sections and math needed to satisfy the compliance check.

**Can this Connector run FEA simulations or structural math?**
No. This is a strictly stateless reasoning gatekeeper. It does not perform mathematical structural analysis or run simulations. It validates the structural logic of the AI's engineering reasoning based on the inputs provided, ensuring no assumptions are skipped.

**Why did the Prover reject my design with CODE_COMPLIANCE_BLIND?**
Because the reasoning relied on vague appeals like 'industry standards' or 'standard engineering practice'. To pass the Prover, you must cite specific US codes (e.g., ASCE 7-22, AISC 360-16) and applicable sections.

**What happens if I omit material grades?**
The Prover will reject the design with TOLERANCE_OMITTED. In engineering, 'steel' or 'concrete' is not a specification. You must specify exact grades like 'ASTM A992' or '4000 psi compressive strength'.

**Can this MCP run FEA simulations or structural math?**
No. This is a strictly stateless reasoning gatekeeper. It does not perform mathematical structural analysis or run simulations. It validates the structural logic of the AI's engineering reasoning based on the inputs provided, ensuring no assumptions are skipped.