caribbean_get_raccordement
Read-only
Procédure raccordement réseau solaire Guadeloupe : 8 étapes EDF SEI, délais réels terrain. Prix : 0.020 USDC.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| payment_tx_hash | No | Hash tx USDC Base. |
Caribbean Data API — Tropical Autonome
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the price (0.020 USDC) and content focus beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it does not explain whether payment is required upfront, how the payment_tx_hash is used, or what happens if the hash is missing/invalid.
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?
The description is a single sentence that conveys the core purpose and price with no filler. It is front-loaded and efficient.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple data retrieval tool, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it does not specify the return format (text, structured data), whether payment is mandatory, or the workflow for using the payment hash. These omissions could confuse an agent deciding how to invoke the tool.
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?
The schema already describes the only parameter (payment_tx_hash) as a USDC Base transaction hash, so schema coverage is 100%. The description mentions price but does not add additional meaning to the parameter itself, such as format or necessity.
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 clearly states the tool provides a solar network connection procedure in Guadeloupe with 8 EDF SEI steps and real-field delays. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which cover other Caribbean topics like biodiversity or market data.
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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The price is mentioned but there is no context about preferred use cases or exclusions compared to sibling tools.
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.
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools have clearly distinct domains (solar, biodiversity, water, etc.), but the pair caribbean_get_marches_publics and caribbean_get_marches_publics_dom overlap significantly, differing only in geographic scope. The sub-group of 'caye' tools (marche, vanille, vetiver) are also thematically similar, though descriptions clarify their specific commodities. Overall, an agent could generally select correctly, but a few boundary cases exist.
Naming Consistency4/5
The tools overwhelmingly follow a caribbean_get_<subject> convention, with only two exceptions: caribbean_analyse_solaire (uses 'analyse' instead of 'get') and caribbean_list_marketplace (uses 'list' instead of 'get'). This makes the pattern predictable and readable, with minor deviations that are still intuitive. The subject names are consistently descriptive, though some use abbreviations like 'dom' and 'oa' that might require context.
Tool Count3/5
24 tools is on the heavy side for a single server, particularly given that many tools are single-purpose data lookups (e.g., biodiversity, eDNA, tourism). The count is justifiable for a wide-ranging Caribbean data API, but it risks overwhelming an agent with a large surface. It is not excessive enough to be absurd, but it's in the 'heavy' zone.
Completeness4/5
The server covers multiple domains comprehensively, such as solar energy (tariffs, irradiation, connection, tax credit, financing) and public contracts (Guadeloupe and all DOM). The marketplace meta-tools (llms_txt, list_marketplace, get_provider) ensure discoverability, but there is no general search or aggregation tool. Some areas like agriculture or real estate beyond what's present could be considered gaps, but the core coverage is solid.