Skip to main content
Glama

energyai

by com.energyaisolution
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_power_service_quote

Create a signed, 15-minute, scope-bound quote for EnergyAI’s $1 Power Screen from non-sensitive site and workload facts. Returns the quoteToken required by run_power_screen, exact price, evidence boundary, authorization class, and higher-tier handoffs. Free and never spends funds. [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.
stagedMwNoOptional first-stage load in MW; defaults to the lesser of 4 MW and targetMw.
targetMwYesTarget compute or flexible-load capacity in MW.
coolingModeNounknown
siteLocationYesCounty/state, balancing area, or approximate site. Do not send a street address or contact information.
storageHoursNoOptional available storage duration in hours.
workloadTypeYes
powerEvidenceNoBuyer-stated evidence maturity; confirmed still requires documentary verification.unknown
flexibilityHoursNoHours per week the workload can shift.

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

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the 15-minute expiry, the signed/scope-bound nature, that it is free and never spends funds, and that no API key is required. It does not spell out auth/permission requirements or failure modes, keeping it short of 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return value in the first two sentences, then the cost/safety caveat. Slightly redundant tail ('Free and never spends funds. [always free — no API key required]') repeats the free claim, but overall it is tight and well ordered.

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 tool with no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the return payload (quoteToken, exact price, evidence boundary, authorization class, higher-tier handoffs). The main gap is the routing decision against sibling link/quote tools, but the operational essentials are covered.

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 78%, so the schema already documents most parameters including apiKey handling, defaults, and enums. The description adds only the 'non-sensitive site and workload facts' framing and does not clarify parameter syntax or constraints beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Create a signed, 15-minute, scope-bound quote for EnergyAI's $1 Power Screen,' and even names the downstream consumer (run_power_screen) and what the token enables. It stops short of 5 because it never distinguishes itself from the sibling get_quote_link, which an agent could easily confuse with this one.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

It implies when to use it (you need a quoteToken before running a Power Screen, built from non-sensitive facts), which is useful context. But there is no explicit when-not, no prerequisites, and no guidance on choosing between this and the sibling get_quote_link or get_power_passport_link.

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