Skip to main content
Glama

DC Hub — Data Center Site Selection & Colocation: Electricity, Power Grid, Gas, Fiber

by cloud.dchub

Compare ISO Regions

compare_isos
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a user wants a side-by-side of 2-4 ISO grids — fuel mix, demand, renewable/gas share, interconnection-queue depth, time-to-power — in one call instead of N sequential get_grid_intelligence calls. Example: "Compare PJM vs ERCOT vs CAISO on gas share, renewable share, and queue depth right now." — compare_isos isos="PJM,ERCOT,CAISO". Params: isos is a comma-separated list (2-4 max) drawn from the 7 live US ISOs: "PJM" | "ERCOT" | "CAISO" | "MISO" | "SPP" | "NYISO" | "ISO-NE". Returns: {isos[], comparison:{:{demand_mw, generation_mix_pct, renewable_share_pct, gas_share_pct, constraint_score, excess_power_score, avg_time_to_power_months, avg_queue_wait_months, queue_depth_gw, retail_price_cents_kwh}}, as_of}. ★avg_time_to_power_months (DCPI per-market estimate, ISO-averaged) and avg_queue_wait_months (proxy from live queue DEPTH) are DIFFERENT measurements — quote whichever you mean by name. Do NOT use to rank ALL grids globally (use get_grid_scoreboard) or for the single-ISO deep brief (use get_grid_intelligence).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
isosYesComma-separated list of 2-4 US ISO/RTO grid regions to compare, e.g. "PJM,ERCOT,CAISO" (valid: ERCOT, PJM, MISO, CAISO, SPP, NYISO, ISONE)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quotaNoCaller quota state (remaining calls, tier) when available.
_entityNoPayload class discriminator (e.g. facility|market|iso_grid|queue_results|deal|report|response) — branch on this before parsing the rest.
citationNoMachine-readable citation: how to attribute DC Hub (dchub.cloud) for this payload. Normally an OBJECT {source, url, license, cite_as, retrieved_at}; a bare string is accepted and carries the attribution line itself.
provenanceNoCollection-level provenance block: {source, method, as_of, verification_counts, cite_url_template, license, cite_as}. Quote the verification level when citing.
_front_doorNoIn-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.
_return_loopNoSuggested next-session delta call (get_changes since=24h) so you pull only what changed.
site_evaluation_handoffNoPre-built follow-up calls (analyze_site / get_water_risk args) when the payload carries coordinates — an array of {tool, parameters, why} entries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable non-obvious behavioral context: avg_time_to_power_months and avg_queue_wait_months are DIFFERENT measurements with different derivation methods, and the description warns the agent to quote whichever it means by name.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: use case, example, parameter constraints, return shape, semantic caveat, and alternatives. The critical usage guidance is front-loaded, and the caveat about the two time metrics is explicitly highlighted with stars.

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?

For a comparison tool with one parameter and a rich output shape, the description covers everything needed to call it correctly: valid inputs, count constraints, example, return fields, and exclusions. The output schema exists, but the description still usefully enumerates the included metrics and clarifies the meaning of the proxy measures.

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 for the only parameter is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by reinforcing the 2-4 count constraint, providing the full list of valid values, giving a concrete example, and explaining that the parameter is comma-separated.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'side-by-side of 2-4 ISO grids' and enumerates the exact metrics compared. It also clearly differentiates itself from get_grid_intelligence and get_grid_scoreboard, which removes ambiguity about what this tool uniquely does.

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 says when to use the tool ('when a user wants a side-by-side of 2-4 ISO grids') and when not to: 'Do NOT use to rank ALL grids globally (use get_grid_scoreboard) or for the single-ISO deep brief (use get_grid_intelligence).' It even provides a concrete example query and parameter invocation.

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

All DC Hub — Data Center Site Selection & Colocation: Electricity, Power Grid, Gas, Fiber toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation1/5

With 85 tools, several families are heavily overlapping: semantic_search and search_intelligence are explicitly documented as the same retrieval with different call shapes, save_site and save_to_shortlist both persist sites, and list_saved_sites and get_shortlist both read saved sites. Additionally, site scoring is split across analyze_site, get_composite_site_score, score_facility, and rank_sites, making correct tool selection very difficult for an agent.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and mostly readable, but conventions are mixed: many use get_* (get_facility, get_grid_intelligence), others use verb phrases (analyze_site, compare_isos, rank_markets), and some are bare noun phrases (ai_capacity_index, hyperscaler_deals, grid_transition_radar, site_selection_canvas). The search family alone uses search, search_facilities, semantic_search, and search_intelligence with no consistent pattern.

Tool Count1/5

85 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server, far beyond the 3-15 well-scoped range and above the 50+ threshold described as an extreme mismatch. Even with a wide domain like data-center siting, this many tools overwhelms agent context and makes selection costly.

Completeness4/5

The domain surface is exceptionally broad: siting, grid, gas, fiber, water, climate, tax, permitting, deals, news, facilities, saved shortlists, alerts, webhooks, key management, and research dossiers are all covered with connected workflows. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete or update for saved sites and no pause/resume for standing intents, but these are workable rather than blocking.

Resources