compare_sites
Side-by-side comparison of 2-4 parcels for power, gas, fiber, market and risk, ranking them by overall score and recommending a winner with rationale.
Instructions
Use when a user has narrowed to 2-4 candidate parcels and wants a side-by-side winner picker across power, gas, fiber, market & risk — with a recommended pick and the reason. Runs the analyze_site read on each parcel and ranks them by overall score. Example: "Compare a Phoenix parcel and an Ashburn parcel for a 50MW build — which wins and why?" — compare_sites locations="33.45,-112.07;39.04,-77.48" capacity_mw=50. Params: locations is a semicolon-separated list of "lat,lon" pairs (2-4 max); capacity_mw is the target load in MW (e.g. 50-500). Returns (full, paid): {sites:[{lat, lon, capacity_requested_mw, overall_score (0-100 composite), interpretation (verdict string, e.g. "Excellent site"), scores{power_infrastructure, gas_pipeline_access, fiber_connectivity, market_conditions, risk_resilience — each 0-100}, nearby{substations_50km, power_plants_80km, gas_pipelines_50km, facilities_100km, fiber_carriers_in_state, generation_capacity_mw, total_capacity_mw}, fiber{connectivity_score, carrier_count, nearest_carrier_km, near_net_bucket, single_carrier_risk, top_carriers[{carrier, distance_km}]}, power_cost, location}], winner:{lat, lon, overall_score, why}, decision_rationale, citation}. Each site carries the same shape analyze_site returns. compare_sites is a paid/Pro tool — the free tier returns a locked preview, not the comparison. Do NOT use for a single site (use analyze_site) or to rank entire markets (use rank_markets).
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| locations | No | Semicolon-separated list of 2-4 "lat,lon" pairs to compare, e.g. "33.45,-112.07;39.04,-77.48" | |
| capacity_mw | No | Target power load for the build in megawatts (MW), e.g. 50 (typical 50-500) |