Skip to main content
Glama

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

by cloud.dchub

Set Site Alert

set_site_alert

Arm an email watch on a site you already saved (FREE with a key) — DC Hub emails you when that site’s DCPI score, grid capacity, or nearby facilities move, so you don’t have to keep re-checking. On the free tier the alert is delivered to your human’s bound email (call bind_email first; notify_email is forced to that address). Pro can send to any address. The "monitor my shortlist for me" loop: call save_site first (it returns a saved_site_id), then set_site_alert on that id. Params: saved_site_id (required integer, from save_site or list_saved_sites), trigger_type ("dcpi_change" | "capacity_change" | "new_facility_nearby", default "dcpi_change"), threshold (number — the points/MW move that fires it, default 5), notify_email (required — the address the alert is sent to). Answers "let me know if anything changes at the site I saved". Try: set_site_alert saved_site_id=12 trigger_type=dcpi_change threshold=5 notify_email=you@firm.com. Returns {ok, alert_id, message}. Do NOT use to watch a whole MARKET (use set_market_alert) or to save a new site (use save_site); this arms a monitor on ONE already-saved site.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
thresholdNoThe points/MW move that fires the alert (default 5)
notify_emailYesEmail address the alert is sent to (required); on free tier forced to your human's bound email
trigger_typeNoWhat movement fires the alert: "dcpi_change" (default), "capacity_change", or "new_facility_nearby"
saved_site_idYesThe saved_site_id returned by save_site or list_saved_sites (required)

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

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by explaining the delivery behavior, free-tier email restrictions, the fact that the alert monitors an already-saved site, and the return shape. It also gives the underlying event semantics (scpre move, capacity move, new facility), which annotations cannot convey.

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 serves a purpose: front-loaded purpose, then constraints, workflow, parameters, example, return value, and exclusions. The structure is logical and the concrete example saves an agent from guessing call syntax.

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 stateful alert-arming tool with prerequisites and tier differences, the description covers prerequisites, parameters, defaults, return format, and exclusions. An agent has everything needed to invoke correctly without additional lookups.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Even though the schema already covers all four parameters, the description adds practical meaning: saved_site_id is tied to save_site/list_saved_sites, threshold is a number of points/MW, presence of a concrete example call, and the ordering with bind_email. This is substantial added value, not just repetition.

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 verb ('arm an email watch'), a precise resource ('a site you already saved'), and the triggered behavior (email on DCPI/grid/facility changes). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from set_market_alert and save_site, so an agent can select it correctly.

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?

Includes explicit sequencing guidance ('call save_site first ... then set_site_alert'), a note to bind_email first on the free tier, and clear do-not-use directives for market alerts or new site saves. This fully tells an agent when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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