DC Hub — Data Center & Energy Intelligence

Accept Capacity Terms

accept_capacity_terms

Instructions

Use ONLY after your human has read and agreed to DC Hub's introduction terms (https://dchub.cloud/listings#terms): records that acceptance, once per terms version, so Capacity Source listing details open for them. Call it when source_capacity returns a listing locked with access.reason terms_acceptance_required, never on your own judgement: nothing opens without your human's agreement. Requires an identified caller (claim_free_key, then bind_email with your human's address, or an OAuth connection) and accept_terms=true. Returns accepted and the terms version, recorded in DC Hub's lead register. Do NOT use to request an introduction (use request_capacity_intro) or to browse listings (use source_capacity).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`accept_terms`	No	Set true ONLY after your human has read and agreed to the introduction terms at https://dchub.cloud/listings#terms. Unless it is exactly true, nothing is sent
`terms_version`	No	The terms version your human agreed to, e.g. access.unlock.terms.version from source_capacity. Omit to send the version currently published

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`quota`	No	Caller quota state (remaining calls, tier) when available.
`_entity`	No	Payload class discriminator (e.g. facility\|market\|iso_grid\|queue_results\|deal\|report\|response) — branch on this before parsing the rest.
`citation`	No	Machine-readable citation: how to attribute DC Hub (dchub.cloud) for this payload. Normally an OBJECT {source, url, license, cite_as, retrieved_at}; a bare string is accepted and carries the attribution line itself.
`provenance`	No	Collection-level provenance block: {source, method, as_of, verification_counts, cite_url_template, license, cite_as}. Quote the verification level when citing.
`_front_door`	No	In-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.
`_return_loop`	No	Suggested next-session delta call (get_changes since=24h) so you pull only what changed.
`site_evaluation_handoff`	No	Pre-built follow-up calls (analyze_site / get_water_risk args) when the payload carries coordinates — an array of {tool, parameters, why} entries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv2.12.13Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (which only mark it as a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation), the description discloses the required identity chain (claim_free_key then bind_email or OAuth), the once-per-terms-version semantics, the 'nothing opens/sent' gating on accept_terms, and the side effect of recording in DC Hub's lead register.

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 gating condition and always-true trigger, and most sentences carry load. The parenthetical identity chain and repeated warnings make it slightly longer than needed, but there is little pure waste.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still briefly notes the return (accepted plus terms version). Combined with prerequisites, alternatives, and trigger conditions, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly without further lookup.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the schema, including the exactly-true requirement and the omit-to-use-published-version default. The description restates these rather than adding new meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (accept) and resource (capacity terms) and immediately delineates scope: it records acceptance so Capacity Source listing details open. It explicitly differentiates from siblings by naming request_capacity_intro and source_capacity as different operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit precondition trigger (call when source_capacity returns a listing locked with access.reason terms_acceptance_required), an explicit prohibition ('never on your own judgement'), and two named alternatives for adjacent needs. Nothing about when/when-not is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server