Utilify

search_utility_providers

Find utility providers when someone is moving to a Texas address or setting up utilities at a new home. Covers nine utility types: electricity, internet, gas, water, sewer (city wastewater), trash, propane (rural / off-grid alternative to natural gas), septic (rural / off-grid alternative to city sewer), and home security. Use when the user says things like 'I'm moving to Houston next month', 'I just bought a house in Austin and need to set up power', 'what's the cheapest electricity in Dallas', 'who provides internet at this apartment in San Antonio', or rural-address questions like 'I'm moving to a ranch in Bandera, what do I do for gas and sewer' (answer: propane + septic). Returns available providers with a classified plan type (fixed / free_nights / solar_buyback / 100_renewable / etc.) and whether the cheapest plan is rental-friendly; pass tenancy='rent' to prefer short-contract plans or tenancy='own' to surface solar-buyback options. Caveats: (1) water results may include many PWS rows within a ZIP's county radius — filter to primaryForZip === true for the single canonical provider likely to serve the parcel. (2) Trash providers in TX suburbs include metadata.contractedHauler (Republic Services / Community Waste Disposal / Waste Management / Best Trash / Texas Disposal Systems / Waste Connections) — surface this so users know the actual pickup company in addition to the city dept. (3) Propane and septic appear at all TX ZIPs including urban ones; in cities with natural gas + city sewer, treat them as alternative options rather than primary. (4) Sewer is city wastewater (urban); septic is on-site (rural / unincorporated). (5) For electricity in Texas, results are filtered to retail providers (REPs) that actually serve the address's TDU — Oncor (DFW), CenterPoint (Houston), AEP TX Central (Corpus / RGV), AEP TX North (Abilene / San Angelo), or TNMP (scattered). Agents do not need to filter by TDU themselves. The TDU slug is exposed as tdu per electricity provider so agents can explain to the user why the list is shorter than they might expect (e.g. ~20 REPs at a Houston address vs. ~47 statewide). At municipal-utility ZIPs (Austin Energy, CPS Energy, El Paso Electric) the only electricity provider returned is the muni; REPs cannot sell power there.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`address`	Yes	Full street address including city, state, and ZIP code
`tenancy`	No	Whether the user is renting or buying. Changes plan preferences and enables homeowner-only cross-sells (solar).
`utility_types`	No	Filter by utility types. If omitted, returns all available types.

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: automatic TDU filtering, water result filtering by primaryForZip, trash contracted hauler inclusion, and propane/septic appearing in all ZIPs. It also explains muni-utility behavior and tenancy effects.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and uses bullet points for caveats, making it easy to scan. However, it is somewhat lengthy; a few sentences could be tightened without losing meaning, so it's not a perfect 5.

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 complexity (3 parameters, multiple utility types, and no output schema), the description is comprehensive. It addresses edge cases like rural addresses, muni-utility zones, and how to interpret results, leaving no obvious 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%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining that tenancy changes plan preferences and enables solar cross-sells, and that utility_types filter but can be omitted to return all. It provides context beyond parameter names and descriptions.

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 finds utility providers for Texas addresses covering nine specific utility types. It uses specific verbs like 'find' and 'covers' and differentiates from sibling tools by detailing exact use cases such as moving to Texas or setting up utilities.

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 when-to-use scenarios with examples like 'I'm moving to Houston'. However, it does not explicitly exclude other tools or compare directly to siblings like compare_providers or get_promotions, which could guide an agent more precisely.

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

All Utilify tools Inspect

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

A4.7/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool serves a distinct function: searching, comparing, getting details, promotions, signing up, checking status, generating checklist, and solar interest. No overlapping purposes; agents can clearly differentiate.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., search_utility_providers, get_move_checklist), making them predictable and easy to learn.

Tool Count5/5

With 8 tools, the set is well-scoped for a Texas utility assistant. It covers the essential workflows without being too sparse or overwhelming.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the full lifecycle: search, compare, details, promotions, signup, status, checklist, and solar interest. There are no obvious gaps for the stated domain of Texas utility setup.

Resources

Need Help?