Jithox EU Energy Label Preflight

Prepare a preflight receipt

prepare_energy_label_preflight_receipt

Read-only

Bundle the preflight lookups into one idempotent Ed25519-signed receipt committing to the FINGERPRINTED inputs, record references, sources, freshness and decision states — provable evidence of WHAT was looked up and WHEN. Attests the lookups, never a registration, conformity or market-access outcome. Preflight evidence only — never a conformity, CE, GPSR, safety or market-access determination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`bundle`	Yes	The preflight results to attest (fingerprinted inputs, sources, decision states — no raw query values).
`createdAt`	Yes	ISO timestamp the bundle was assembled.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes
`billing`	Yes
`product`	Yes
`receipt`	Yes
`decision`	Yes
`retryable`	Yes
`capability`	Yes
`provenance`	Yes
`generatedAt`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`schemaVersion`	Yes
`receiptEnvelope`	No
`decisionCategory`	Yes

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly), the description reveals idempotency, Ed25519 signing, commitment to fingerprinted inputs and decision states, and explicitly negates any conformity/registration use. This adds critical behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and key attributes (idempotent, signed), followed by a clarifying exclusions sentence. Every word 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?

For a complex tool with nested bundle and output schema, the description covers purpose, exclusions, and behavioral traits (idempotency, signing). The output schema handles return values, so no further explanation needed.

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?

Both parameters have detailed schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description references 'fingerprinted inputs' and 'no raw query values,' consistent with the schema, but adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('bundle') and resource ('preflight lookups into one Ed25519-signed receipt'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling lookup tools. It also states the core output: provable evidence of WHAT and WHEN.

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?

Explicitly states that this tool attests lookups only and 'never a registration, conformity or market-access outcome,' and explicitly excludes CE, GPSR, safety, or market-access determinations. This gives the agent clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Jithox EU Energy Label Preflight tools Inspect

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

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

The tools are mostly distinct: search finds candidates, two getters retrieve different aspects (full record vs energy label data), compare analyzes metrics, and prepare bundles receipts. The two getters could be confused, but their descriptions clearly differentiate the full record from the energy-label-specific structure.

Naming Consistency4/5

All tool names follow a verb_noun pattern with a domain prefix (eprel or energy_label), e.g., compare_eprel_product_metrics, get_eprel_product_record. The consistency is high, though 'prepare_energy_label_preflight_receipt' uses 'energy_label' instead of 'eprel', a minor deviation.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is a well-scoped set for a preflight workflow: search, retrieve record, retrieve label data, compare metrics, and create a signed receipt. Each tool fills a distinct role with no redundancy or bloat.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers the core preflight lifecycle: discovery, retrieval, comparison, and evidence bundling. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool for listing supported product groups or metric catalogs, but agents can work around these using search and get.

Resources

Need Help?