Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ChargerDojo

by com.chargerdojo
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Start a conformance run

chargerdojo_start_conformance_run

Start a conformance run against an endpoint registered on this account, the sandbox or your own: one module, or every module the endpoint offers. Returns the report id at once. Against your own endpoint it needs the Integrate plan, and a module sold on a higher plan names it. Answers: does my endpoint conform to OCPI.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "targetId": "<targetId>"
    },
    "name": "chargerdojo_start_conformance_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
moduleNoOne module to grade, at the endpoint's OCPI version; chargerdojo_list_checks lists its checks. Omit to grade every module the endpoint offers.
retryKeyNoA key of your choosing for this run. Calling again with the same key returns the run it started instead of starting another. Omit it to start a new run on every call.
targetIdYesThe registered endpoint to run against, from chargerdojo_list_targets.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: the run is asynchronous ('Returns the report id at once'), own-endpoint runs require the Integrate plan, and higher-plan modules are gated. It does not describe failure behavior or how the run's results are later retrieved, but the plan gating and async nature are the important disclosures.

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?

Five short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does and what it returns. The plan sentence ('a module sold on a higher plan names it') is compressed to the point of ambiguity, which slightly undercuts readability but not length discipline.

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 an async tool with no output schema, the description correctly signals an immediate report-id return and the plan gate. It omits pointing the agent at the follow-up siblings (get_run_verdict, get_run_checks, list_runs), which would be the natural next step after a start.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all three parameters including the module enum and retryKey. The description only restates the module scope and target types, adding little syntax or format meaning; baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Start a conformance run against an endpoint') plus scope ('one module, or every module the endpoint offers'). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling run tools like chargerdojo_run_journey or chargerdojo_run_sandbox_journey, which look similar from an agent's viewpoint.

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?

Gives clear triggering context ('Answers: does my endpoint conform to OCPI') and the module-vs-all choice, plus the plan prerequisite for own endpoints. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use it, so it lacks the explicit routing that a 5 requires.

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

All ChargerDojo toolsInspect
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.

Resources