Skip to main content
Glama

epwforge-mcp

by io.github.guzz-labs

analyze_weather

Compute design conditions, HDD/CDD, monthly stats, and peak heating/cooling days for one or more EPW files. Accepts a url (existing EPW), urls (compare 2+), or config (synthesize on the fly with morphing/UHI/events/smoke). Config mode runs the full generation pipeline server-side but returns only stats — never the EPW content. Token-saver: pass compact: true to get a ~10-field headline response (~100 tokens) instead of the full ~800-token payload. Use compact for sanity-checking, dashboards, or when chaining many calls; full when you need monthly arrays / peak days / full ASHRAE. Optional include_full_ashrae adds ASHRAE 0.4/1/2% cooling + 99.6/99% heating design conditions with mean coincident dewpoint. Optional include_improbability (config mode) adds a stress-test score. Optional include_idf adds ready-to-paste EnergyPlus SizingPeriod:DesignDay objects. Optional units ('imperial' default | 'metric'). Presentation: when calling with urls (multiple files), the response includes a comparisons array — render it as a markdown table to the user. Lead with the headline delta, not the raw data. No auth required; no credits charged.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoEPW URL to analyze (single file)
urlsNoMultiple EPW URLs for comparison (first = baseline). Max 10.
unitsNoOutput units (default: imperial). When 'metric', temperatures are °C, wind m/s, precip mm, distance km/m.
configNoSynthesize an EPW server-side and analyze it. Stats only — file never returned. lat + lon required. Same morph/UHI/event params as generate_weather_file.
compactNoReturn a ~10-field headline-only response (~100 tokens) instead of the full ~800-token payload. Drops monthly arrays, peak days, n_hours, weather_basis blob. Good for sanity checks, dashboards, batched chained calls. Set to false (default) when you need the full payload.
include_idfNoAdd ready-to-paste EnergyPlus SizingPeriod:DesignDay IDF objects to the response. AEC-facing. Ignored when compact=true.
include_full_ashraeNoAdd ASHRAE 0.4%/1%/2% cooling DB + 99.6%/99% heating DB design conditions to the response. Free. Ignored when compact=true.
include_improbabilityNoAdd EPWForge's stress-test improbability score (config mode only). Indicates how extreme the synthesized scenario is vs historical baselines.

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. It discloses that config mode runs server-side generation but does not return the EPW file, explains response size differences (compact ~100 tokens vs full ~800), and notes that optional flags are ignored when compact=true. However, it does not address what happens if none of `url`, `urls`, or `config` is provided, nor error handling or rate limits.

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 information-dense but poorly structured: all details (capabilities, parameter explanations, usage tips, presentation) are in a single paragraph. Bold highlights help but do not compensate for the lack of sections or bullet points. It contains no fluff but could be more efficiently organized.

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?

Given the complexity (nested config, multiple modes, no output schema), the description covers main outputs and response size but lacks a full list of response fields beyond the compact mention. Edge cases (e.g., conflicting parameters) are not addressed. It is adequate for typical use but not exhaustive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds significant value beyond schema: it explains `compact` drops specific fields (monthly arrays, peak days, etc.), `include_improbability` only works in config mode, and `units` defaults with examples. This contextual behavior is not evident from the schema alone.

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 computes design conditions, HDD/CDD, monthly stats, and peak days for EPW files. It distinguishes three modes of operation (single URL, multiple URLs, config synthesis) and contrasts with sibling `generate_weather_file` by noting config mode returns only stats. The verb 'compute' and resource 'EPW files' are specific, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use compact vs full output ('Use compact for sanity-checking...') and hints that config mode is for synthesis. It states 'No auth required; no credits charged', but does not explicitly compare with siblings like `chart_weather` or `explore_design_conditions`. The advice on rendering comparisons as a markdown table adds practical usage direction.

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

All epwforge-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Each tool has a distinct primary function: analysis, charting, interactive exploration, station search, file generation, and bundle preview. Some overlap exists between 'analyze_weather' and 'explore_design_conditions', but descriptions clarify single-site vs. batch and interactive vs. static usage.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., analyze_weather, chart_weather, find_station). Verbs are action-oriented and nouns clearly indicate the target resource.

Tool Count5/5

With 6 tools, the server is well-scoped for EPW weather data tasks. Each tool serves a necessary function without superfluous additions, fitting the ideal 3-15 range.

Completeness4/5

Core workflows (find station, analyze stats, visualize, generate custom files, purchase) are covered. A minor gap is the lack of a direct raw file download tool, but the EPW URLs from 'find_station' effectively serve that purpose.

Resources