Get monthly carbon intensity (gCO2/kWh) for any country worldwide using ISO2 country codes. Covers 70+ countries including Japan, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Egypt, Nigeria, and more. Use for Scope 2 emissions calculations or comparing carbon intensity of electricity globally.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | Yes | ISO2 country code e.g. JP, CN, IN, BR, ZA, KR, AU, NZ, MX, EG, NG, US. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses monthly granularity and global coverage, but lacks details on data source, update frequency, rate limits, or any caveats. This is adequate but has gaps.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence contributes value: what it does, coverage, and usage context. No unnecessary wording.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context: the metric, unit, granularity, scope, and intended use cases. It doesn't detail the response format, but that is inferable from the described output.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and already explains the 'country' parameter as ISO2 code with examples. The tool description reiterates this and adds a few more country examples but does not add significant semantic value beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves monthly carbon intensity (gCO2/kWh) for any country using ISO2 codes, with a specific global scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_carbon_intensity by emphasizing worldwide coverage and lists specific countries.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description explicitly mentions use cases: 'Use for Scope 2 emissions calculations or comparing carbon intensity of electricity globally.' It provides clear context for when to use, but does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, hence not a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.