Generate a yearly BDEW standard load profile (W per 1,000 kWh/a) as CSV, plot, and statistics by profile ID and year, with optional resolution and holiday settings.
One BDEW profile for a year (W per 1,000 kWh/a): CSV, plot and statistics.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| year | Yes | ||
| profile_id | Yes | H0, H25, G0-G6, G25, L0-L2, L25, P25 or S25 | |
| resolution_min | No | ||
| holiday_country | No | DE | |
| holiday_subdivision | No | German state code, e.g. BY, BW |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the output forms (CSV, plot, statistics) and the normalization unit (W per 1,000 kWh/a), but says nothing about auth, rate limits, or what the returned series represents beyond the unit.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its terseness veers toward under-specification rather than true completeness.
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?
Five parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description documents neither the input parameters nor the structure of the returned CSV/statistics. It is too thin for a tool of this complexity.
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 only 40%; profile_id and holiday_subdivision are documented in the schema, while year, resolution_min, and holiday_country are not. The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
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?
States a specific verb+resource: retrieving one BDEW profile for a given year, and notes the output forms (CSV, plot, statistics). The singular 'one ... profile' implicitly distinguishes it from list_bdew_profiles, but no sibling is named explicitly.
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 gives no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent must infer from 'one' that this is the single-profile variant versus list_bdew_profiles, with nothing stated to confirm that routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.