Skip to main content
Glama

TexasHomeBills — Texas electricity plans

by com.texashomebills
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

electricity_ev_charging_cost

Monthly and yearly cost of charging an electric vehicle at home on the cheapest fixed-rate plans in a Texas utility: each plan's estimated cost with and without the EV, cost per mile. Give ev_miles plus a vehicle (EPA efficiency from fueleconomy.gov) or ev_kwh_per_mile. The response also has a time_of_use section: free-nights and free-weekends plans priced on overnight charging (ev_night_share, default 0.80; home_night_share), each with its exact free hours as written in its Electricity Facts Label, or the reason it was excluded. No gasoline comparison (we do not collect gasoline prices). Free for non-commercial use with attribution; commercial use requires Pro.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kwhNoAverage monthly usage in kWh (default 1000). Spread over a typical Texas year (summer-heavy).
monthsNoOptional: 12 monthly kWh values, January first. Overrides kwh.
utilityYesUtility (TDU) id. Dallas–Fort Worth: oncor · Houston: centerpoint · Corpus Christi / Rio Grande Valley: aep_central · Abilene / San Angelo: aep_north · Texas City / Lewisville: tnmp · Lubbock: lpl
vehicleNoEV model (2025, EPA efficiency from fueleconomy.gov); or give ev_kwh_per_mile
ev_milesYesOptional EV: miles driven per month; adds home-charging kWh to every month (fixed-rate plans).
ev_night_shareNoTime-of-use section: share of EV kWh charged overnight (10 pm - 6 am), 0-1 (a value above 1 is read as a percent). Default 0.80
ev_kwh_per_mileNoOptional instead of vehicle (default 0.30)
home_night_shareNoTime-of-use section: share of the home's kWh in a free-nights plan's free hours. Default: the share the plan's own label assumes (35%)
charging_efficiencyNoDefault 0.90 with ev_kwh_per_mile; 1.0 with vehicle (EPA figures include charging losses)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / ev_night_share
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0.8,
+  "description": "Time-of-use section: share of EV kWh charged overnight (10 pm - 6 am), 0-1 (a value above 1 is read as a percent). Default 0.80",
+  "maximum": 1,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
    • addedInput schema / properties / home_night_share
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Time-of-use section: share of the home's kWh in a free-nights plan's free hours. Default: the share the plan's own label assumes (35%)",
+  "maximum": 1,
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
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 disclose real behavioral traits: the response structure (per-plan cost with/without EV, cost per mile, time_of_use section with exact free hours from each Electricity Facts Label or exclusion reason), data source (EPA efficiency from fueleconomy.gov), and licensing terms (free non-commercial, Pro for commercial). It does not cover failure modes or rate limits, keeping it from 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 purpose and cost outputs before the finer time_of_use details. It is dense and long, packing three distinct response concerns plus licensing into one block, but nearly every sentence carries information relevant to calling or interpreting the tool.

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?

With nine parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description compensates well by explaining the response sections (fixed-rate costs and time_of_use) and licensing. It leaves some gaps, such as error conditions and whether results are scoped to a specific plan count, but is largely complete for correct invocation.

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 the schema already documents all nine parameters including defaults and enums. The description restates several of these (ev_night_share default 0.80, home_night_share, ev_kwh_per_mile) without adding syntax or meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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+resource: the monthly/yearly cost of home EV charging on cheapest fixed-rate plans in a Texas utility, including cost per mile and a time_of_use section. The EV-charging scope is specific enough to distinguish it from the generic electricity_cheapest and plan-comparison siblings, and it explicitly rules out a gasoline comparison.

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?

Gives clear input selection guidance ('Give ev_miles plus a vehicle ... or ev_kwh_per_mile') and a scope exclusion ('No gasoline comparison (we do not collect gasoline prices)'). It stops short of routing against siblings like electricity_cheapest, but the intended use is unambiguous.

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

All TexasHomeBills — Texas electricity plans 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