Skip to main content
Glama

Ampworth calculators

Heat pump running cost

heat_pump_running_cost
Read-onlyIdempotent

Compare what a household spends heating on its current fuel with what the same heat would cost from a heat pump.

The heat demand is worked out from the household's own metered fuel use, not from a model, because a year of bills describes a particular house far better than any estimate of it. Supply the annual fuel use in the fuel's own unit (kWh for gas and electricity, litres for oil and LPG, kilograms for coal), its price per unit in pounds, and the seasonal efficiency of the existing appliance, which defaults to a realistic figure for that fuel instead of the one on the badge.

The comparison turns on one ratio. A heat pump costs less to run whenever its seasonal coefficient of performance beats the ratio between the price of a unit of electricity and the price of a unit of heat from the current fuel. The result reports that break-even figure explicitly.

SCOP must be the figure at the flow temperature the system is actually designed for. The same machine can return 4.2 at 35 degrees and 3.1 at 55, and quoting the first for a system designed at the second is the commonest way of overstating a saving.

This is a running cost comparison. It says nothing about the capital cost or any grant.

Method from MCS 007. These calculators follow the published MCS methods, for understanding a system and checking a quotation. Anything that gets installed still needs a design and a site survey from a certified installer.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fuelNoThe fuel being replaced: 'mains_gas', 'oil', 'lpg', 'electricity' or 'coal'. Defaults to 'mains_gas'.
scopYesSeasonal coefficient of performance of the proposed heat pump: the units of heat it delivers per unit of electricity, averaged over a year at the design flow temperature. Required.
annualFuelUseYesHow much of that fuel the house uses in a year, in the fuel's own unit: kWh for gas and electricity, litres for oil and LPG, kilograms for coal. Take it from a year of bills. Required.
fuelPricePerUnitYesPrice of one unit of that fuel, in pounds. Required.
nonHeatingFractionNoShare of that fuel used for something other than heating and hot water, such as a gas hob, as a decimal. A hob is usually 0.03 to 0.05. Defaults to 0.
applianceEfficiencyNoSeasonal efficiency of the existing appliance, as a decimal. Defaults to the typical figure for the fuel.
electricityPricePerKwhYesPrice of a unit of electricity, in pounds. Required.
fuelStandingChargePerDayNoDaily standing charge for that fuel in pounds, if it has one. A house that removes its gas boiler can usually stop paying this.
electricityStandingChargePerDayNoDaily electricity standing charge in pounds. It is paid either way, so it only changes the answer if the tariff changes with the heat pump.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fuelYes
scopYes
notesYes
methodYes
verdictYes
referencesYes
breakEvenScopYesThe seasonal efficiency at which the heat pump costs exactly what the current system costs. Below this it costs more.
annualDifferenceYesPositive when the heat pump costs less.
costPerKwhHeatNowYesWhat a unit of delivered heat costs today, in pounds.
currentAnnualCostYes
percentDifferenceYes
heatPumpAnnualCostYes
annualHeatDemandKwhYesUseful heat the house actually needs in a year, after the existing appliance's losses are taken off its fuel input.
applianceEfficiencyYes
breakEvenPriceRatioYesHow many times dearer a unit of electricity is than a unit of the current fuel. Compare it with the SCOP: a heat pump saves money whenever the SCOP beats this ratio.
costPerKwhHeatHeatPumpYesWhat a unit of delivered heat would cost from the heat pump.
heatPumpElectricityKwhYesUnits of electricity the heat pump would use in a year.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive). The description adds real behavior beyond them: the method comes from MCS 007, the result reports the break-even ratio, and it flags what the tool does NOT model (capital cost, grants). It could go further on output shape, though the output schema carries that.

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-loaded with the comparison, then inputs, then the break-even logic and the SCOP caveat, then scope/method. Four paragraphs is on the long side, but the SCOP and break-even sentences earn their place by preventing common errors.

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?

For a 9-parameter calculator with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the domain framing, methodological provenance, and limitations an agent needs. Return values are correctly left to the output schema.

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, but the description adds genuine meaning: units per fuel type, that appliance efficiency defaults to a realistic figure not the badge value, and the critical caveat that SCOP must reflect the design flow temperature. That is meaningful context beyond 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?

The first sentence states a specific comparison: what a household spends on its current fuel versus what the same heat would cost from a heat pump. It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like heat_pump_size or heat_pump_noise, and it explicitly scopes itself as running cost only, excluding capital cost and grants.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explains the intended context (understanding a system, checking a quotation) and warns that anything installed still needs a design and site survey. It does not name a sibling tool or an alternative for capital-cost questions, but the 'when to use' context is clear.

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.

Resources