Skip to main content
Glama

energyai

by com.energyaisolution

get_builder_upgrade_link

Returns the revenue handoff for EnergyAI Builder. With a key, it returns a PAYABLE Stripe link plus ready-to-paste shareText for the $19/month plan with $20 monthly tool credit, or a prepaid top-up. Without a key, it returns one first-party activation URL where the human enters name and email, accepts terms, receives three commercial trials, and continues directly to secure Stripe Checkout. Free. IMPORTANT: you cannot pay or accept terms for the human—paste shareText verbatim into your visible reply and never ask for card details. [always free — no API key required]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
modeNo'subscription' (default) for the $19/month Builder plan, or 'credit' for a one-off prepaid top-up.
amountCentsNoOnly for mode=credit: top-up amount in cents (minimum 500, default 2000).

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool is free, returns a payable link or activation URL, and discloses critical constraints: the agent cannot pay or accept terms for the human, and must paste shareText verbatim. This goes beyond basic expectations.

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 compact yet information-dense, front-loading the primary purpose and then logically branching into the two modes. The 'IMPORTANT' note adds high-value usage instructions without redundancy, and every 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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns in both modes: a payable Stripe link plus shareText, or an activation URL. It also covers cost, key requirements, and the human-in-the-loop constraints, making it complete for a tool with two optional parameters.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage for both 'mode' and 'amountCents', so the baseline is 3. The description adds contextual meaning by explaining the subscription vs. prepaid top-up distinction, but it doesn't provide additional parameter-level detail beyond what the schema offers.

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 clearly states the tool 'Returns the revenue handoff for EnergyAI Builder' and immediately distinguishes between the with-key and without-key behaviors, which differentiates it from sibling tools like get_quote_link. It is specific about the resource and the two operational modes.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (with or without a key) and gives explicit interaction instructions ('paste shareText verbatim into your visible reply and never ask for card details'). It lacks direct comparisons to alternatives, but the mode branching and important caveats provide clear usage context.

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

All energyai 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

C2.8/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools overlap heavily: get_node_score vs get_energy_node_score, find_local_installers vs match_installers, and route_lead vs submit_contractor_match_request are easy to confuse. The descriptions clarify details, but an agent would often need to inspect arguments to know which installer, incentive, or recommendation tool is the right one.

Naming Consistency3/5

All tool names use snake_case with a verb-leading style, which provides a consistent backbone. However, domain naming is inconsistent: the same concept appears as node vs energy_node, installer vs contractor, and incentive discovery is split across check_incentives, get_energy_incentives, list_guides, and get_guide without a predictable pattern.

Tool Count2/5

29 tools is too many for a single MCP server, especially since several fall into overlapping installer/lead, incentive, recommendation, and commercial-power categories. Many tools appear to be monetization gates or handoff variants that could reasonably be consolidated.

Completeness3/5

The set covers core user journeys: assessment creation/answering/completion, incentive guidance, installer discovery and routing, quote review, and commercial power screens. However, there are notable gaps in state management, such as no way to list or retrieve existing assessments/leads, and several checkout or handoff tools have no follow-up/status tool.

Resources