A
licenseB
qualityD
maintenanceConnects AI agents to energy infrastructure with 30+ tools for managing sites, assets, dispatch, settlements, compliance, and carbon tracking.
34
31
1
MIT
Netzhandwerker EU Power Dispatch API
Server Details
EU power dispatch for wallet-enabled compute, DePIN, battery and trading agents.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
MCP client
Glama
MCP server
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
100% free. Your data is private.
Tool Definition Quality
B3/5.0
Tool DescriptionsC
Average 2.8/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.
Server CoherenceA
Disambiguation5/5
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one schedules a dispatch plan, the other provides market context. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
Naming Consistency5/5
Both tools follow the same verb_noun pattern with 'buy_' prefix, making them predictable and consistent. The pattern is clear and uniform.
Tool Count3/5
With only two tools, the server feels thin for its stated scope. While the tools are useful, the count is borderline and may not justify a dedicated server.
Completeness2/5
The server only offers creation of dispatch plans and fetching market briefs, but lacks operations for managing existing plans (e.g., cancel, list, update). This leaves significant gaps for a power dispatch API.
Available Tools
2 toolsbuy_dispatch_planBInspect
Schedules a deadline-bound compute, DePIN, battery or power-trading workload into an actionable German or European power window. Returns exact timing, expected EUR cost and savings, uncertainty, freshness, expiry and decision trace.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| deadline | Yes | ||
| power_kw | Yes | ||
| energy_kwh | Yes | ||
| constraints | No | ||
| risk_profile | Yes | ||
| opportunity_id | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
B3/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'schedules' and lists return fields. It fails to disclose whether the tool is destructive, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. The behavioral impact of scheduling is not addressed beyond the immediate action.
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 two sentences long with no redundant words. It front-loads the core action and lists return values efficiently. However, it could be more structured by grouping elements or adding separation.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, nested constraints, no output schema), the description lacks crucial context on parameter relationships, preconditions, and validation rules. The return value list is helpful, but the overall completeness for agent decision-making is low.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the six parameters (opportunity_id, power_kw, energy_kwh, deadline, risk_profile, constraints). 'Deadline-bound' weakly hints at the deadline parameter, but no concrete semantics are provided.
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 'schedules' and identifies the resource as 'deadline-bound workload into an actionable power window'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'buy_market_brief' and 'find_energy_opportunity' by focusing on scheduling execution rather than buying briefs or finding opportunities.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage for scheduling workloads into power windows, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites, exclusions, or post-scheduling steps is provided, making the context only inferred.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
buy_market_briefCInspect
Returns licensed ENTSO-E and SMARD spot-market context for compute, DePIN, battery and power-trading agents: published day-ahead prices, volatility, load, renewable share when available, the observed share of published negative-price hours, uncertainty, freshness and expiry.
ParametersJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| region | Yes | ||
| use_case | Yes | ||
| horizon_hours | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions 'licensed' data and 'freshness and expiry', but does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens on data unavailability. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotation coverage.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness3/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single long sentence that packs many details, but lacks structure or prioritization. It is not front-loaded and would benefit from splitting into clear sentences or bullets. Still, it is not overly verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description fails to fully inform an AI agent. It lists returned data fields but does not specify output format, pagination, or error states. The 3 required parameters are not adequately explained. Completeness is inadequate for the tool's complexity.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain the meaning of 'region' or 'horizon_hours', nor does it detail how 'use_case' values relate to the returned data beyond listing agent types. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema.
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 clearly states the tool returns spot-market context with specific data points (prices, volatility, load, etc.) and lists target user types (compute, DePIN, battery, trading agents). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like buy_dispatch_plan or find_energy_opportunity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for market context retrieval, but fails to specify prerequisites, exclusion criteria, or comparison with siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Related MCP Servers
- Flicense-qualityAmaintenanceProvides real-time electricity prices, cheapest hours, and contract comparison for 40+ countries, enabling AI agents to make energy-aware decisions.2
- Alicense-qualityAmaintenance87+ specialized tools for German and European energy data. Direct AI access to Marktstammdatenregister (MaStR), ENTSO-E, Redispatch 2.0, and Grid Operations for utilities and datacenters.2GPL 3.0
- Flicense-qualityBmaintenanceA read-only MCP server that exposes European day-ahead electricity prices for ~41 bidding zones via tools like hourly prices, cheapest hours, current price, and cross-zone summary, enabling AI agents to query energy market data.