Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

EcoCheck

by ai.ecocheck
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Calculate a GHG inventory (ISO 14064-1)

calculate_ghg_inventory
Read-onlyIdempotent

GHG inventory from activity data, reported by ISO 14064-1 category (1-6), GHG Protocol scope and gas: fuels (IPCC 2006 tier-1 defaults; litres, kg, t, GJ, MWh…; stationary or mobile), purchased electricity (official Viet Nam grid factor of the year built in — 2024 = 0.6187 tCO2/MWh, CV 1232/BNNMT-BĐKH — or give your own), refrigerant / SF6 recharges (GWP AR5 or AR6), and custom lines with your own factor (Scope 3 via scope3_category). Biogenic CO2 reported separately; optional uncertainty.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
gwpNoGWP set (AR5 for Vietnam Decree 06 and EU CBAM; default AR5).
linesYesActivity data lines.
periodNoReporting period, e.g. 2026 or 2026-Q1.
organizationNo
number_formatNoOnly for quantities sent as strings: vi = "1.050,5" style (dot thousands), en = "1,050.5" style. Ambiguous strings without it are refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / grid_ef_t_per_mwh / description
      Previous value: -"Electricity: official grid emission factor, tCO2e/MWh."New value: +"Electricity: grid emission factor, tCO2e/MWh. Omit for Viet Nam: the official factor of grid_year (or the period year) is used, e.g. 2024 = 0.6187 (CV 1232/BNNMT-BĐKH)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / grid_year
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Electricity without grid_ef_t_per_mwh: year of the official Viet Nam grid factor (default: year in period, else latest).",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / quantity / description
      Previous value: -"Plain number in the given unit. Vietnamese writing uses a dot for thousands and a comma for decimals: \"1.050 lít\" = 1050, \"1.220 MWh\" = 1220, \"3,2 tấn\" = 3.2."New value: +"JSON number in the given unit. Convert Vietnamese writing first (dot = thousands, comma = decimals): \"1.050 lít\" -> 1050, \"1.220 MWh\" -> 1220, \"3,2 tấn\" -> 3.2. A string such as \"1.050\" is refused as ambiguous unless number_format is set."
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / use / description
      Previous value: -"Fuel use (CH4/N2O factors), default stationary."New value: +"Fuel use (CH4/N2O factors), default stationary. mobile = road vehicles; off_road = forklifts, construction / farm machinery (IPCC Table 3.3.1, diesel or gasoline)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / lines / items / properties / use / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "stationary",
-  "mobile"
-]New value: +[
+  "stationary",
+  "mobile",
+  "off_road"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / number_format
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only for quantities sent as strings: vi = \"1.050,5\" style (dot thousands), en = \"1,050.5\" style. Ambiguous strings without it are refused.",
+  "enum": [
+    "vi",
+    "en"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), yet the description adds real behavioural context: biogenic CO2 is reported separately, uncertainty is optional, IPCC 2006 tier-1 defaults are applied for fuels, the official grid factor is used unless overridden, and ambiguous string quantities are refused. It stops short of describing the response shape or how multi-line results are aggregated.

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 content is dense and largely front-loaded, but it is delivered as one sprawling sentence with deeply nested parentheses, which makes it harder to scan than it needs to be. Almost every clause carries information, so little is wasted, but the structure could be broken into distinct sentences for legibility.

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?

For a compute tool with no output schema, the description does the necessary work: it names the reporting dimensions of the result (ISO category, scope, gas, biogenic CO2 separately) and the optional uncertainty. It is close to complete, though it does not say how multiple lines are combined or what the returned structure looks like.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 80%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely extends it: it explains the Vietnam grid factor default (2024 = 0.6187 tCO2/MWh, CV 1232/BNNMT-BĐKH), that Scope 3 is routed through scope3_category on custom lines, and that GWP defaults to AR5. These add decision-relevant meaning beyond the per-field schema text.

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 states a precise verb and resource ('GHG inventory from activity data'), and pins down the output framing: reported by ISO 14064-1 category 1-6, GHG Protocol scope and gas. It also enumerates the input families (fuels, electricity, refrigerants, custom lines), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like ghg_emission_factors (factor lookup) or check_ghg_inventory_obligation (obligation check).

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 is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the tool to call when it holds activity data, and the description notes you may either use the built-in Viet Nam grid factor or 'give your own'. But it never names an alternative tool or an explicit when-not condition, so routing must be inferred.

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

All EcoCheck toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources