Skip to main content
Glama

The New Engineer — HVAC

check_refrigerant_switzerland

Read-onlyIdempotent

Swiss refrigerant regulation check (ORRChim / ChemRRV annex 2.10, OFEV synthesis of May 2026, rules adopted 29.10.2025) plus refrigerant data from EN 378-1 Annex E: GWP (AR4, the ORRChim basis), ODP, LFL, safety class, practical limit.

Returns, for a given refrigerant and installation: the date from which machines using it can no longer be placed on the Swiss market (import from 01.01.2027, sale to third parties from 01.07.2027), the date from which filling with virgin refrigerant is banned, the period when only reclaimed refrigerant may be used, and the date from which all filling is banned.

SCOPE: heating, air conditioning, building cooling and process cooling, data centres included. NOT food refrigeration, cold rooms or deep freezing: those are a different trade, and the tool declines them instead of answering.

Use it whenever the user asks about a refrigerant in Switzerland — its GWP / PRG, flammability, whether a chiller, heat pump, split, VRF or cold room using it may still be sold or refilled — in any language: fluide frigorigène, Kältemittel, refrigerante, refrigerant, R-32, R-410A, R-290, CO2, NH3...

The answer depends on the installation. The regulation distinguishes: use (building cooling, food refrigeration medium / low temperature / combined / deep freezing, process cooling, heat pump mainly for heating, ice rink), cooling capacity Q0K or heating capacity Q0H, self-contained (factory-built packaged unit) or not, split, direct expansion (incl. VRF), secondary coolant loop (chilled water / brine), air-cooled condenser and refrigerant charge. THIS TOOL ANSWERS ONE QUESTION ONLY: may the refrigerant still be sold and refilled in Switzerland, and until when. It says NOTHING about safety in the room - charge limits, machine room, detection, ventilation, ATEX. That is check_en378_zones. A question that mixes both - « may I use R-32 for 3 kg in a server room, and until when can I refill it » - needs BOTH tools: call this one for the dates, and check_en378_zones for the room. Do not answer half the question.

NEVER guess these. Call the tool with what the user gave: it returns provisional: true, the possible scenarios, and questions_to_ask in the order that matters most. Ask them (one or two at a time), then call again. Natural refrigerants need no questions. Build your answer on answer_outline; quote exceptions as possible, never as granted.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
splitNoTrue for a split system (indoor/outdoor units linked by refrigerant lines laid on site). Omit if unknown.
languageNoThe user's language, for labels. French or English text; translate for de/it/es.en
applicationNoUse of the installation: 'climatisation_batiment' (building cooling, incl. reversible heat pump used mainly for cooling), 'froid_alimentaire_positif' (food/perishables, use temp ≥ 0 °C), 'froid_alimentaire_negatif' (≥ −25 °C), 'froid_alimentaire_combine' (multiplex medium + low temp with common discharge), 'surgelation' (< −25 °C), 'froid_process' (industrial process cooling), 'pac_chauffage' (heat pump mainly for heating), 'patinoire_permanente', 'patinoire_temporaire'. Omit if unknown.
refrigerantYesRefrigerant designation as the user wrote it: 'R-32', 'R410A', 'R1234ze', 'CO2', 'propane'…
heat_recoveryNoTrue if rejected heat is recovered.
self_containedNoTrue if 'autonome': factory-built circuits in a frame/casing and no gas-carrying part connected on site (packaged chiller, monobloc heat pump, rooftop). Omit if unknown.
gwp_if_unlistedNoONLY if a previous call said the refrigerant is not in the database: its GWP (AR4) from the manufacturer's datasheet, given by the user.
odp_if_unlistedNoONLY with gwp_if_unlisted: its ODP (0 for HFC/HFO).
direct_expansionNoTrue if the refrigerant evaporates directly in the room units / evaporators (DX, incl. VRF); False if it cools a water or brine loop. Omit if unknown.
evaporator_countNoNumber of evaporators.
secondary_circuitNoTrue if cold is distributed through a secondary coolant loop (chilled water, glycol, brine). Omit if unknown.
family_if_unlistedNoONLY with gwp_if_unlisted: 'naturel' (natural), 'stable' (contains any HFC/PFC — e.g. R-454B, R-454C, R-455A), 'hfo' (only HFO and/or natural components).
cooling_capacity_kwNoPeak useful cooling capacity Q0K, kW. Omit if unknown.
heating_capacity_kwNoPeak useful heating capacity Q0H, kW (heat pumps). Omit if unknown.
air_cooled_condenserNoTrue if heat is rejected through an air-cooled condenser (heat pump: its air heat exchanger). Omit if unknown.
refrigerant_charge_kgNoTotal refrigerant charge, kg. Omit if unknown.
refrigerant_circuit_countNoNumber of refrigerant circuits.
simultaneous_heating_coolingNoTrue for simultaneous heating and cooling with at least 2 air heat exchangers.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive; the description adds a genuinely valuable behavioral contract: provisional results, scenarios, questions_to_ask, answer_outline, out-of-scope refusal, and multilingual label behavior. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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?

The description is long, but the complexity of the domain justifies it: 18 parameters, legal nuances, and a sibling boundary. It is well organized and front-loaded with the legal dates and scope before workflow instructions, and the multilingual/refrigerant examples are useful rather than padding.

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?

An output schema already exists, so the description need not restate return fields. It supplies the missing operational context: when to ask clarifying questions, how to split mixed questions across tools, language handling, and scope/refusal behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke and iterate with the tool correctly.

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?

The schema already documents all 18 parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is high. The description adds why those parameters matter—legal distinctions by application, capacity, self-contained/split, direct expansion vs secondary loop, and charge—and clarifies that natural refrigerants need no follow-up questions. The only minor weakness is a slight tension between the food-refrigeration exclusion and the food-refrigeration enum values in the schema, though the description frames those as decline cases.

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 states a precise service: Swiss refrigerant market/refill ban dates under ORRChim/ChemRRV, with the specific legal sources named. It explicitly distinguishes itself from check_en378_zones and narrows the tool to a single question, so an agent cannot confuse it with its sibling.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger ('whenever the user asks about a refrigerant in Switzerland'), an explicit exclusion (food refrigeration, cold rooms), and names the sibling tool for room-safety questions. It also handles the mixed-question case by telling the agent to call both tools, and instructs the agent to ask clarifying questions rather than guess.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources