Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Wai

by com.wht-ai
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Equipment makers and product families (Wai checked catalogue)

wai_equipment
Read-only

Example product families of energy equipment from several makers (European, US and Chinese): PV modules, PV inverters, BESS containers and PCS, wind turbines, electrolysers, power and dry-type transformers, MV switchgear / RMU, HV breakers and disconnectors, UPS, diesel generator sets. Each entry has only the ratings the maker's own page or datasheet states, its link and the date checked - no prices, no single brand pushed. Call with class (see class_list) or words (maker, family, rating). Suited to the equipment / vendor part of a project report. Answer with the returned numbers, not an estimate made before the call.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "wai_equipment"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
classNoclass id, e.g. pv_module, wind_turbine, electrolyzer, bess, bess_pcs, pv_inverter, power_transformer, mv_switchgear, hv_breaker
queryNowords: maker, family or rating, e.g. "Huawei", "800 kV", "tracker"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive and open-world behavior, and the description adds real provenance: only ratings stated on the maker's page or datasheet, each with a link and a date checked, no prices, no brand preference. It also adds a strong anti-hallucination instruction ("Answer with the returned numbers, not an estimate made before the call"), though it says nothing about result volume or pagination.

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 category enumeration is long but earns its place by supporting keyword matching against the free-text query, and the operational instructions (how to call, what is in each entry, how to answer) follow in a compact block. Slightly dense as a single paragraph, with no explicit line breaks, but no filler sentences.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers what the entries contain (ratings, link, date checked), what they do not contain (prices, brand bias), and how to phrase the call. The only gap is the absence of any hint about result set size or truncation behavior.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning: the two parameters are alternatives (class OR free-text words), and the query text is characterized as maker, family or rating, which the schema only partly conveys through examples. It also points to the class_list enumeration for valid class ids, which the schema leaves as an open string.

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?

The description names the concrete resource (a checked catalogue of equipment makers and product families) and enumerates the categories covered, so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not differentiate itself from siblings such as wai_official_data, which is the only thing keeping it from a 5.

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?

"Suited to the equipment / vendor part of a project report" plus "Call with class (see class_list) or words" gives clear intended-use context and the two invocation modes. There is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Wai 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