Skip to main content
Glama

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

by cloud.dchub

Get Gas Economics

get_gas_economics
Read-onlyIdempotent

Behind-the-meter / gas-fired power inputs for a US data-center market: Henry Hub spot, regional basis differential, and the delivered industrial + electric gas tariff ($/MMBtu), each with its own source label. Pass market= (e.g. "northern-virginia", "dallas", "phoenix"). ★ WITHDRAWN 2026-08-08: the gas-to-grid levelized cost ($/MWh across CCGT/peaker heat-rate scenarios) is NO LONGER RETURNED. Five surfaces published a $/MWh for the same market on the same day up to 5.5x apart because each chose the burner-tip price by a different rule, with no sanity gate — this endpoint served a physically impossible $6.73/MWh for Phoenix stamped data_basis: "live". The heat-rate arithmetic was correct; the input price selection was not. The $/MMBtu layers are sourced and still returned; gas_to_grid_status carries the reason. DO NOT quote a cached $/MWh figure, and do not derive one yourself from the $/MMBtu without saying that you did. Do NOT use for the electricity grid fuel mix (use get_grid_data).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
marketYesMarket slug (metro), e.g. northern-virginia, dallas, phoenix — valid slugs come from rank_markets / get_market_dcpi_rank
heat_rate_btu_per_kwhNoOptional custom generator heat rate in Btu/kWh for the gas-to-grid $/MWh scenario, e.g. 6800 (avg CCGT)

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

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses a significant behavioral trait: the gas-to-grid $/MWh output was withdrawn after serving inconsistent and physically impossible values. It explains the withdrawal date, the reason, and the current behavior without contradicting the read-only/idempotent 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 longer than average, but the extra length is mostly operational warning content that prevents misuse. The resource definition is front-loaded, and the withdrawal guidance is clearly delimited, though it could be tightened.

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?

The annotations and output schema already cover read-only behavior and return structure. The description supplies critical withdrawn-field context and an explicit exclusion to get_grid_data. The main gap is the unresolved role of heat_rate_btu_per_kwh in the schema relative to the withdrawn $/MWh output.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds market slug examples and clarifies which data layers still exist, but it does not explicitly explain how the optional heat_rate_btu_per_kwh parameter should be treated now that the gas-to-grid $/MWh scenario is no longer returned.

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 names a specific resource: behind-the-meter gas-fired power inputs for US data-center markets, and enumerates the returned $/MMBtu components (Henry Hub spot, regional basis differential, delivered industrial + electric gas tariff). It also differentiates itself from get_grid_data, so an agent can select it confidently.

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 not to use this tool for the electricity grid fuel mix and points to get_grid_data as the alternative. It also gives clear operational constraints: do not quote cached $/MWh figures, do not derive them without attribution, and rely on gas_to_grid_status for the reason.

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