Skip to main content
Glama

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

Score Facility

score_facility
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a user wants an independent 0-100 grade for ONE existing facility across 7 dimensions — power, fiber, water, climate_risk, tax_environment, talent_pool, expansion. Example: "How does the CoreWeave Las Vegas site score, power-weighted?" — score_facility facility_id= weighting=power_priority. Params: facility_id or name (required); weighting one of "balanced" (default) | "power_priority" | "risk_priority" | "expansion_priority". Returns: composite 0-100, tier_classification, peer comparison, and per-dimension detail. Do NOT use for a raw lat/lon parcel (use analyze_site), to compare 2 or more sites (use compare_sites), or to find similar sites (use find_alternatives).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
weightingNoScoring profile: "balanced" (default), "power_priority", "risk_priority", or "expansion_priority"
facility_idYesThe facility id/slug to score (required), from a prior search_facilities result

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 readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior; the description adds useful context around the output behavior (composite, tier, peer comparison, per-dimension detail) and the independent nature of the score. This adds value beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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, parameters, returns, and exclusions. The most important information is front-loaded, and the do-not-use guidance prevents costly mis-invocation.

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 moderate-complexity scoring tool, the description covers when, how, what is returned, and which sibling tools to use instead. The output schema exists, so the return values do not need deeper documentation in the description.

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 value with a concrete power-weighted example and the full weighting options including the default. It also claims facility_id or name is accepted, which is an extra semantic not present in the schema and may indicate schema under-specification.

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 specific verb and resource: scoring ONE existing facility with a 0-100 grade across 7 named dimensions. It also names the sibling tools it is not (analyze_site, compare_sites, find_alternatives), so an agent can disambiguate before opening schemas.

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?

It explicitly gives the when-to-use condition (independent grade for one existing facility) and a concrete example. It lists three exclusions with their alternatives: raw parcel, multi-site comparison, and similar-site discovery.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Multiple tools occupy nearly identical semantic space: search/search_facilities/search_intelligence/semantic_search all retrieve data, and analyze_site/compare_sites/score_facility/get_composite_site_score/rank_sites all score or rank locations. Despite extensive disambiguation in the descriptions, the boundaries are subtle enough that an agent will likely misroute queries. Account and meta tools (claim_free_key, bind_email, unlock_more_data, subscribe_digest, recover_my_key, execute_plan, plan_query, discover_tools) add further selection noise.

Naming Consistency4/5

The vast majority of tools follow a clear snake_case verb_noun convention (get_*, search_*, list_*, set_*, save_*, compare_*, analyze_*, rank_*, plan_*). A few noun-phrase names break the pattern (deal_autopsy, hyperscaler_deals, grid_transition_radar, site_selection_canvas, standing_intent, ai_capacity_index), but these are still readable and discoverable.

Tool Count1/5

83 tools is an extreme count for any server, far beyond the 25+ threshold that already signals bloat. The domain is broad, but the catalog is inflated by overlapping variants, multiple meta-tools (execute_plan, plan_query, discover_tools, get_agent_registry, get_backup_status, summarize_for_citation), and account/upgrade plumbing (claim_free_key, bind_email, recover_my_key, unlock_more_data, subscribe_digest). This imposes heavy context and selection costs on agents.

Completeness5/5

The data-center siting domain is covered exhaustively: single-site scoring, market ranking, grid/gas/fiber/water/climate/disaster/tax/permitting intelligence, interconnection queues, construction pipeline, deals/news, saved-site monitoring, alerts, research dossiers, and citation support. Every workflow has a continuation path, so agents will not hit dead ends.