Renewable Vision energy data

Official register rows

get_register

Read-only

Rows from one official Saudi register as this platform last mirrored it. register: sppc (Saudi Power Procurement Company, the Principal Buyer — every solar and wind project with its contracted capacity in MW and status connected|construction), swpc (Saudi Water Partnership Company / SHARAKAT — independent desalination, sewage treatment, transmission and strategic storage projects with capacity, regions, commercial operation year, contract model and published tariff; status operation|construction|tendering|planning), swa (Saudi Water Authority open-data catalogue — every dataset the authority publishes, with formats and resource counts; these rows carry no status). Use this rather than a tracker when the question is what the publisher itself lists.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "register": "<register>"
    },
    "name": "get_register"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Rows to return; default 100
`status`	No	Match one status exactly, case-insensitive. The swa catalogue carries none.
`register`	Yes	sppc, swpc or swa

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (read-only, closed-world, non-destructive), so the description's main added value is the freshness caveat — rows are a mirror 'as this platform last mirrored it,' implying possible staleness. It also discloses that the swa rows carry no status, a behavioral quirk an agent must anticipate. Pagination/row-ordering behavior is not described.

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?

Front-loaded with the core promise, then dense parenthetical detail per register; the length is largely justified by the enum semantics. The nested parentheses around swpc and swa make it heavier to parse than necessary.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing return content, and it does so per register (capacity, status, regions, COD, contract model, tariff, formats). It does not describe overall row shape or ordering, but an agent has enough to call and interpret results.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the bare enum by explaining what each register value actually returns and which status vocabularies apply to each. This lets an agent reason about the status filter per register rather than guessing why 'swa' yields no status matches.

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?

Names a specific resource (rows from one official Saudi register) and then fully disambiguates the three register variants with concrete contents for each. It also distinguishes the tool from sibling-style trackers, so an agent can select it without reading further schemas.

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?

Explicitly says to use this rather than a tracker 'when the question is what the publisher itself lists,' which is a real routing condition. It stops short of stating exclusions in the other direction (e.g., when a tracker or search tool is preferable for cross-register or filtered queries).

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

All Renewable Vision energy data 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.

Resources

Need Help?