Loadfactor: business electricity and gas supply, solar and EV charging quotes

Describe a need to Loadfactor in words

interpret_requirement

Give Loadfactor the buyer's requirement, or a correction or addition to it, in their own words: it is read into a structured requirement (each value says which words it came from), conflicting or unclear facts come back as one question, and words not yet read are kept as written. Pass the requirement (id, token) from the first answer to continue it. Nothing is sent or ordered: send_requirement sends it when the buyer says so. When you already have the fields in structured form, use submit_request instead.

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": {
      "utterance": "<utterance>"
    },
    "name": "interpret_requirement"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`turn_id`	No	Your id for this message: a retry with the same id is applied once
`timezone`	No	The buyer's IANA time zone, for reading dates
`utterance`	Yes	The buyer's words, as written
`requirement`	No	The requirement to continue

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by describing what comes back: a structured requirement with word-level provenance, a single consolidated question for conflicts/ambiguity, and verbatim retention of unread words. It also scopes the side effect ('nothing is sent or ordered'), which is important given readOnlyHint=false — the write is local to requirement state, not a commitment. Minor gap: it doesn't formally state that the requirement state is persisted/mutated, which the annotations imply.

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, then return behavior, then the two sibling alternatives. Dense but every clause carries a distinct fact; slightly heavy as a single run-on chain of colons and commas rather than separated sentences.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing the shape of the answer (values with source words, one clarifying question, retained raw text). Combined with the continuation guidance, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 already 100%, so baseline is 3; the description earns an extra point by explaining the lifecycle of the nested requirement object — the id/token pair from the first answer is what continues the conversation — which is not obvious from field descriptions alone.

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?

States a precise verb and resource — giving Loadfactor the buyer's requirement 'in their own words' to be read into a structured requirement — and immediately separates it from send_requirement (submits) and submit_request (already-structured fields). The agent can pick correctly without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit routing rules with conditions: use this for words, use submit_request when fields are already structured, and only call send_requirement when the buyer actually says to send. It also covers the correction/addition case and how to continue an existing requirement via the id/token.

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

All Loadfactor: business electricity and gas supply, solar and EV charging quotes tools Inspect

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

Need Help?