Skip to main content
Glama

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

by cloud.dchub

Plan Fiber Leadin

plan_fiber_leadin
Read-onlyIdempotent

Plan N diverse, road-following fibre lead-in routes from a candidate data-center site to a carrier hotel / POP, with indicative build cost and a route-diversity read. Answers "can I get N diverse fibre routes into this site, how far, how much, and where do they share a corridor?". Example: plan_fiber_leadin from="250 Paringa Road, Murarrie QLD" to="20 Wharf Street, Brisbane City QLD" n=4. Params: from (lat,lng OR street address), to (lat,lng OR address — e.g. a NextDC/Equinix POP), n (1-6 routes, default 4), fibre ("720F"|"1440F"), bore_m (river/rail bore length in metres, optional). Returns per-route length_km + GeoJSON geometry, total_route_km, diversity {min_separation_m_midhaul, shared_street_km}, and indicative cost {capex_usd, opex_usd_yr}. INDICATIVE auto-routed road corridors — NOT engineered alignments; subject to survey, DBYD and carrier confirmation. Do NOT use for a single site-suitability score (use analyze_site) or fibre-provider footprints (use get_fiber_intel).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nNoNumber of diverse routes to plan, 1-6 (default 4)
toYesDestination carrier hotel/POP as "lat,lng" OR an address, e.g. "20 Wharf Street, Brisbane City QLD"
fromYesOrigin site as "lat,lng" OR a street address, e.g. "250 Paringa Road, Murarrie QLD"
fibreNoFibre count spec for cost estimate: "720F" or "1440F"
bore_mNoRiver/rail bore length in metres to add to the route, 0-100000 (optional)

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

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: outputs are 'INDICATIVE auto-routed road corridors — NOT engineered alignments' and are 'subject to survey, DBYD and carrier confirmation'. This is exactly the kind of limitation an agent needs to know before relying on the result.

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 long but every sentence earns its place: definition, example, parameter semantics, return contract, caveat, and exclusions. The core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the structure is dense without being padded.

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?

The tool is moderately complex (5 params, 2 required), but the description covers input formats, output fields, cost/diversity shape, caveats, and when not to use it. The output schema exists, so the description does not need to re-explain return structure beyond naming the key fields. No significant gap remains.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds domain semantics on top: from is the candidate data-center site, to is a carrier hotel/POP, n controls route diversity, fibre is the 'spec for cost estimate', and bore_m is 'river/rail bore length'. It also gives a concrete worked example, which helps the agent map parameters to real usage.

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 action (Plan) and a specific resource (diverse, road-following fibre lead-in routes between a data-center site and a carrier hotel/POP), and states the question it answers ('can I get N diverse fibre routes...'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools analyze_site and get_fiber_intel by naming what it is not for.

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 gives clear when-to-use context via the question it answers and an example invocation. It goes further and explicitly states exclusions: 'Do NOT use for a single site-suitability score (use analyze_site) or fibre-provider footprints (use get_fiber_intel)', which is exemplary routing guidance.

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