Epa Emissions

Ghg Facility Emissions

ghg_facility_emissions

Read-onlyIdempotent

The biggest greenhouse-gas-emitting facilities in a US state (EPA GHGRP), ranked by total CO2-equivalent emissions. Returns each facility's name, location, industry sector(s), and total metric tons CO2e. State-scoped (pass a state). Data lags ~1.5 years — latest full year is auto-selected (currently 2023) unless a year is given.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`year`	No	Reporting year (default: latest available, ~2023).
`limit`	No	Max facilities to return, ranked by emissions (default 20, max 200).
`state`	Yes	US state — 2-letter code ("TX", "CA") or full name ("Texas"). Required (this is state-scoped, not national).
`facility_name`	No	Optional — filter to facilities whose name contains this text.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	Yes	Number of facilities returned
`state`	Yes	State name searched
`facilities`	Yes	Array of facility records with emissions data

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedJul 9, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / facility_name / description

Previous value: -"Facility name to search for (partial match using CONTAINING)."New value: +"Optional — filter to facilities whose name contains this text."

changedInput schema / properties / limit / description

Previous value: -"Max results (default 20, max 100)."New value: +"Max facilities to return, ranked by emissions (default 20, max 200)."

changedInput schema / properties / state / description

Previous value: -"Full state name (e.g., \"Texas\", \"California\")."New value: +"US state — 2-letter code (\"TX\", \"CA\") or full name (\"Texas\"). Required (this is state-scoped, not national)."

addedInput schema / properties / year

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Reporting year (default: latest available, ~2023).",
+  "type": "number"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Number of facilities returned",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "facilities": {
+      "description": "Array of facility records with emissions data",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "city": {
+            "description": "City location",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "facility_id": {
+            "description": "Facility identifier",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "industry_type": {
+            "description": "Industry classification",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "latitude": {
+            "description": "Geographic latitude",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "longitude": {
+            "description": "Geographic longitude",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Facility name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "state": {
+            "description": "State name",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "total_ghg_emissions_mt_co2e": {
+            "description": "Total GHG emissions in metric tons CO2 equivalent",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "year": {
+            "description": "Reporting year",
+            "type": [
+              "number",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "zip": {
+            "description": "ZIP code",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "state": {
+      "description": "State name searched",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "state",
+    "facilities"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "state": "Texas"
+  },
+  {
+    "facility_name": "Power Plant",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "state": "California"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context: data lags ~1.5 years, returns facility details, and is state-scoped. No contradiction.

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?

Two sentences, well-structured, front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description is complete: explains data source (EPA GHGRP), ranking, return fields, state scope, data lag, and optional parameters. No gaps.

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% with each parameter described. The description reinforces meaning by stating 'biggest', 'ranked by total CO2-equivalent emissions', and provides example values. It adds context beyond the schema.

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 it returns the biggest GHG-emitting facilities in a US state, ranked by emissions, including facility details. This distinguishes it from siblings like ghg_emissions_by_sector, which likely aggregates by sector.

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 specifies that it is state-scoped and requires a state parameter, and mentions data lag and auto-selected year. It implicitly guides when to use this tool (facility-level data) but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like ghg_emissions_by_sector.

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

All Epa Emissions tools Inspect

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.