Skip to main content
Glama

energyai

by com.energyaisolution
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_power_passport_link

Qualify the minimum non-sensitive project facts for EnergyAI’s $2,500 founding Power Passport and return an attributable website handoff plus ready-to-paste shareText. Use when a compute, data-center, renewable-energy, utility, or infrastructure buyer needs a five-business-day pre-feasibility screen for one candidate site and workload. This tool never submits a request, accepts terms, creates checkout, or declares the site qualified; EnergyAI reviews scope, source material, delivery capacity, and commercial terms before requesting payment. [always free — no API key required]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiKeyNoOptional existing EnergyAI key for hosts that cannot change Authorization headers. Use it to retain account identity for discovery and get_builder_upgrade_link after a trial. Removed before tool execution and persistence. Omit when the Bearer header is attached; never show the key to the user.
targetMwNoTarget compute or flexible-load capacity in MW.
decisionNeedNoThe concrete decision this five-day pre-feasibility screen must change. Do not include personal or confidential information.
projectStageNoCurrent project stage.
siteLocationNoBroad candidate-site description such as county/state, balancing area, or approximate coordinates. Do not send a street address or contact information.
workloadTypeNoPrimary workload or renewable-project use case.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / apiKey
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional existing EnergyAI key for hosts that cannot change Authorization headers. Use it to retain account identity for discovery and get_builder_upgrade_link after a trial. Removed before tool execution and persistence. Omit when the Bearer header is attached; never show the key to the user.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does it well: it discloses that no submission, term acceptance, checkout, or qualification happens, that review is human, and that the tool is always free with no API key required. It omits latency, rate limits, and what auth the host must supply, which would have earned a 5.

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?

Four sentences, each doing a distinct job: capability plus return, when-to-use, exclusions, and cost/auth note. It is front-loaded on what the tool does, though the '$2,500 founding Power Passport' framing adds promotional weight that is not strictly needed for invocation.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description is right to name the returned artifacts (website handoff, shareText), and it covers scope, prerequisites, exclusions, and cost for a tool with all-optional parameters. Little an agent needs in order to decide and call correctly is missing.

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 every parameter including the optional apiKey already has documentation with no additional secret-channel or identity semantics left for the description to add. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting and the description only gestures at 'minimum non-sensitive project facts'.

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 (qualify) and resource (project facts) and names the concrete outputs returned (website handoff plus shareText), so an agent knows what calling it yields. It does not differentiate from similar-sounding siblings such as get_quote_link or get_power_service_quote, so it stops short of a 5.

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 gives a clear when-to-use condition ('when a compute, data-center, renewable-energy, utility, or infrastructure buyer needs a five-business-day pre-feasibility screen for one candidate site and workload') and explicit exclusions (never submits, accepts terms, creates checkout, or declares the site qualified). It never points the agent to a sibling alternative for the adjacent cases it excludes, so no 5.

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
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