DC Hub

Research Dossier (async)

research_task

Commission an ASYNC, CITED research dossier from DC Hub's corpora (news, deals, facilities, market deep-dive narratives + live market components) — a decision-ready analyst brief with [n] citations, not a lookup. Requires a key (one claim_free_key call), 5 dossiers/day. Submits the question, waits up to ~35s for completion, and returns the finished dossier inline when ready; if still running, returns {task_id} — call research_task task_id= to fetch it. Params: question (required for a new dossier, min 12 chars) OR task_id (poll an earlier one). Typical completion under a minute. Answers "write me a cited brief on this", "what do recent deals say about gas-bridged power". Try: research_task question="What do recent deals say about gas-bridged power for data centers in ERCOT?". Do NOT use for a single fact (use search_intelligence / semantic_search); this synthesizes ACROSS sources with citations.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`task_id`	No	Poll an earlier submission: the task_id returned by a previous research_task call
`question`	No	The research question (min 12 chars) — omit when polling with task_id

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`quota`	No	Caller quota state (remaining calls, tier).
`_entity`	No	Payload class (facility\|market\|iso_grid\|queue_results\|deal\|report\|response); branch on it.
`citation`	No	How to attribute DC Hub: {source, url, license, cite_as, retrieved_at}, or the attribution line as a string.
`provenance`	No	Source, method, as_of, verification_counts, license, cite_as; quote it when citing.
`_front_door`	No	First-tool hint: plan_query(intent) returns the ordered plan.
`_return_loop`	No	Next-session delta call (get_changes).
`site_evaluation_handoff`	No	Follow-up calls [{tool, parameters, why}] when the payload carries coordinates.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 9, 2026
RemovedSep 29, 2026

Changed2 schema fields changedAug 21, 2026

removedInput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

removedOutput schema / $schema

Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"

Changed5 schema fields changedAug 11, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / citation / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -{}
```

addedOutput schema / properties / citation / anyOf

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "properties": {},
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / citation / description

Previous value: -"Machine-readable citation: how to attribute DC Hub (dchub.cloud) for this payload."New value: +"Machine-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."

removedOutput schema / properties / citation / properties
```
Removed value: -{}
```
removedOutput schema / properties / citation / type
```
Removed value: -"object"
```

Changed1 schema field changedJul 21, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / _front_door

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": {},
+  "description": "In-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.",
+  "properties": {},
+  "type": "object"
+}

AddedJul 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses the key requirement (one claim_free_key call), the 5 dossiers/day rate limit, the ~35s wait window, the inline-vs-task_id return behavior, and typical sub-minute completion. Annotations only declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), so this operational context is genuinely additive.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then rate limits, async behavior, params, examples and exclusions, with no wasted sentences. It is dense and the parenthetical corpora list is slightly heavy, but each sentence earns its place.

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?

Complete for a 2-param async tool: it covers the creation path, the polling path, cost/auth prerequisites, timing expectations, and routing to alternatives. An output schema exists, so return-value detail is correctly not repeated.

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%, but the description adds real meaning beyond it: it clarifies that 'question' is required for a NEW dossier (the schema marks 0 required params) and that question/task_id are mutually exclusive modes. This resolves an ambiguity the schema alone leaves open, though the min-12-chars detail is already in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource with scope: 'Commission an ASYNC, CITED research dossier from DC Hub's corpora ... a decision-ready analyst brief with [n] citations, not a lookup.' It explicitly distinguishes itself from lookup-style siblings, so an agent can tell it apart from search_intelligence/semantic_search without opening any schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use ('write me a cited brief on this'), when-not ('Do NOT use for a single fact (use search_intelligence / semantic_search)'), and names the alternatives. It also documents the polling path and provides a concrete sample invocation, leaving nothing to inference.

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

All DC Hub tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.